Devil
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
-
This page is about the concept of the devil. For the Christian devil, see Devil in Christianity, for the Islamic devil, see Iblis. See Satan for the Jewish view. For the devil referred in art, see Devil in fiction.
The Devil is a title given to a supernatural entity, who, in most interpretations of the Abrahamic faiths, is the central embodiment of evil. This entity is commonly referred to by a variety of names, including Satan, Asmodai, Beelzebub, Lucifer and/or Mephistopheles. In classic demonology, however, each of these alternate names refers to a specific supernatural entity.
Christianity views Satan as an angel cast from heaven by God, for being prideful, deceitful, and the tempter.
Contents |
[edit] Etymology
The English word devil derives via Middle English devel and Old English dēofol and Latin Diábolus, from Late Greek Diabolos, meaning, slanderer, from diaballein, to slander: dia-, across + ballein, to hurl (scriptural loan-translation of Hebrew satan). Jerome re-introduced Satan in the Latin Bibles (and thus in the European translations that followed), and English translators have used both in different measures. In the Vulgate, as had been the Greek usage, diabolus and dæmon were distinct, but they seem to have merged semantically in English and other Germanic languages.
[edit] Concept of the devil in world religions
[edit] Christianity
In Christianity the Devil is also known as Satan, and sometimes as Lucifer. He is generally accepted to be an angel who rebelled against God, and has been condemned to the Lake of Fire. In the Bible, he is identified with the serpent in the Garden of Eden, the Accuser of Job, the tempter of the Gospels, and the dragon in the Book of Revelation. He is described as hating all humanity, or more accurately creation, spreading lies, deceit among the world. [1].
[edit] Islam
In Islam the Devil is referred to as Iblis (Arabic: Shaitan) (a word referring to evil devil-like beings). According to the Qur'an, God (called Allah in Arabic) created the Satan out of "smokeless fire", while He created man out of clay. The primary characteristic of the Devil, besides hubris, is that he has no power other than the power to cast evil suggestions into the heart of men.
According to the verses of the Qur’an, the Devil's mission until the Qiyamah or Resurrection Day (yaum-ul-qiyama) is to deceive Adam's children (mankind). After that, he will be put into the fires of Hell along with those whom he has deceived. The Devil is also referred to as one of the Djinns (genies), as they are all created from the smokeless fires. The Qur'an does not depict Shaitan (English: Satan) as the enemy of God, for God is supreme over all his creations and Iblis is just one of his creations. All good is from God Himself and only He can save humanity from the evils of his universe and His creations. All bad deeds are done by our choice. Satan's single enemy is humanity. He intends to discourage humans from obeying God. Thus, humankind is warned to struggle (jihad) against the mischiefs of the Satan and temptations he puts them in. The ones who succeed in this are rewarded with Paradise (jannath ul firdaus), attainable only by righteous conduct.
According to Muslim theology, He was expelled from the grace of God when he disobeyed God by choosing not to pay homage to Adam, the father of all mankind. He claimed to be superior to Adam, on the grounds that man was created of earth unlike himself. As for the angels, they prostrated before Adam to show their homage and obedience to God. However, Iblis, adamant in his view that man is inferior, and unlike angels was given the ability to choose, made a choice of not obeying God. This caused him to be expelled by God, a fact that Iblis blamed on humanity. Initially, the Devil was successful in deceiving Adam, but once his intentions became clear, Adam and Eve repented to God and were freed from their misdeeds and forgiven. God gave them a strong warning about Iblis and the fires of Hell and asked them and their children (humankind) to stay away from the deceptions of their senses caused by the Devil.
[edit] Judaism
In Judaism there is no concept of a devil like in Christianity or Islam. In Hebrew, the biblical word ha-satan means the adversary or the obstacle, or even "the prosecutor" (recognizing that God is viewed as the ultimate Judge).
In the book of Job (Iyov), ha-satan is the title, not the proper name, of an angel submitted to God; he is the divine court's chief prosecutor. In Judaism ha-satan does not make evil, rather points out to God the evil inclinations and actions of humankind. In essence ha-satan has no power unless humans do evil things. After God points out Job's piety, ha-satan asks for permission to test the faith of Job. The righteous man is afflicted with loss of family, property, and later, health, but he still stays faithful to God. At the conclusion of this book God appears as a whirlwind, explaining to all that divine justice is inscrutable with human intellect. In the epilogue Job's possessions are restored and he has a second family to "replace" the one that died.
There is no evidence in Torah, or in the books of the Prophets and other writings, to suggest that God created one being as the source of evil. In fact, the Book of Isaiah, Job, Ecclesiastes, and Deuteronomy all have passages which God is credited for creating both the good and the evil of this world.
Also in book of Job some might notice that God and Satan strangely talk like old friends and it gives a bit of a sight into the God/Satan relationship.
The Hebrew word for evil used above is usually translated as 'calamity', 'disaster' or 'chaos'.
[edit] Zoroastrianism
[edit] In Zoroaster's revelation
In the Gathas, the oldest texts of the Zoroastrian Avesta and believed to have been composed by Zoroaster himself, the poet does not mention a manifest adversary.
Instead, Zoroaster perceives Ahura Mazda to be the one uncreated Creator of all (Yasna 44.7) and simultaneously as the Creator of only the good (Yasna 31.4). This is not a contradiction, for in light of Zoroaster's background of the 10th century BCE Central Asian steppes, the opposition of Creation implies (abstract) anti-creation and not the effect of (substantiated) evil.[1] In Zoroaster's revelation, Ahura Mazda's Creation is empirical "truth", asha, that which is observable. The "antithesis", anti-creation - the negation of empirical truth, which Zoroaster alludes to in the abstract as the "lie" (druj) - is manifest only as decay or chaos (that opposes order).
In Gathic Zoroastrianism, Ahura Mazda is not omnipotent, but will utimately prevail. Until then, the role of mankind is to maintain the order - by resisting chaos - through good thoughts, words and actions. This concept of a free will is perhaps Zoroaster's greatest contribution to religious philosophy.[2]
In Zoroaster's revelation, the daevas, which in later Iranian culture and religion are interpreted to be the forces of evil, are simply the "wrong" or "false" divinities, the followers of which are to be brought back on the path of righteousness.
[edit] In Zurvanism
In Zurvanism (Zurvanite Zoroastrianism), Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu are the "twin" offspring of Zurvan, 'Time'. This monist development, with 'Time' as the supreme and transcendental (but aloof and unapproachable) God, retained Ahura Mazda as the Creator, but made Angra Mainyu the former's adversarial equal.
Zurvanism is first attested (locally) in 3rd century CE Western Iran but was probably already a popular form of Zoroastrianism in the 4th century BCE, and very possibly a product of the contact with Chaldea. Zurvanite Zoroastrianism is attributed to Magi influence.
[edit] In present-day Zoroastrianism
In 1884, Martin Haug proposed a new interpretation of Yasna 30.3 that provided an escape from (what was considered to be) the dualism implicit in the Gathas. According to Haug's interpretation, the "Twin spirits" of 30.3 were Angra Mainyu and Spenta Mainyu, the former being the 'Destructive Emanation' of Ahura Mazda and the latter being His 'Creative Emanation' (see Amesha Spenta for details on the relationship).
In effect, the Angra Mainyu versus Spenta Mainyu theory was simply a rediscovery of the precepts of Zurvanism (Zurvanite Zoroastrianism), with the difference that Angra Mainyu was now not Ahura Mazda's equal, but an emanation of Him. Haug also developed the idea further, interpreting the concept of a free will of Yasna 45.9 as an accommodation to explain where Angra Mainyu came from since Ahura Mazda created only good. The free will, so Haug, made it possible for Angra Mainyu to choose to be evil.
There is no trace of such philosophy in Zoroastrian tradition,[2] but Haug's interpretation was gratefully accepted by the Parsis of Bombay since it provided a defence against Christian missionaries who were attacking the Zoroastrians for the dualism inherent to the idea of (substantiated) Evil that was as uncreated as God was. Notwithstanding the oversight that Zoroastrianism, as an eastern religion, did not hypostatize evil as western religions did, Haug's ideas were subsequently disseminated as a Parsi interpretation, thus corroborating the theories. Haug's ideas were so popular that they are now almost universally accepted as doctrine.
[edit] Hinduism
In contrast to the Christian traditions and Islam, Hinduism does not recognize any central evil force or entity such as the Devil opposing God but does recognize that different beings (e.g., asuras) and entities can perform evil acts, under the temporary dominance of the guna of tamas, and cause wordly sufferings. An embodiment of this is the concept of Advaita (non-dualism) where there is no good or evil but simply different levels of realization.
On the other hand in hinduism, which provides plenty of room for counterpoint , there is also the notion of dvaita (dualism) where there is interplay between good and evil tendencies.[2] Prominent asura is Rahu whose characteristics are similar to those of the Devil. However, Hindus, and Vaishnavites in particular, believe that Vishnu incarnates to destroy evil when evil has reached its maximum. (see avatar.) Additionally, the problem of evil is mostly explained by the concept of Guna and Karma. To be more specific, Hindu philosophy defines that the only existing thing (Truth) is the Almighty God. So, all these asuric tendencies are very inferior cadre and mostly exist in the mind. Asuras are also different people in whom bad motivations and intentions (tamas) have temporarily outweighed the good ones (Sattva). Different beings like siddha, gandharva, yaksha etc. are considered beings unlike mankind, and in some ways superior to men. The main difference from other religions to Hinduism is that no devilic tendency (Tamas) has enough power to face the Truth (Sattva), personified by God. (Bhagavad-gita 7.15, 11.36, 16.18)
In Ayyavazhi, officially an offshoot of Hinduism, in Tamil Nadu (a southern state in India with Dravidian heritage), followers, unlike practically all followers of Hinduism, believes in a Satan-like figure, Kroni. Kroni, according to Ayyavazhi is the primordial manifestation of evil and manifests in various forms of evil, i.e., Ravana, Duryodhana, etc., in different ages or yugas. In response to such manifestation of evil, believers, in Ayya-Vazhi religion believe that God, as Vishnu manifests in His avatars, Rama, Krishna, to destroy evil. Eventually, the Ekam with the spirit (the spirit taken by Narayana only for incarnating in the world) of Narayana incarnates in the world as Ayya Vaikundar to destroy the final manifestaion of Kroni, Kaliyan.
Kroni, the spirit of Kali Yuga is said to be omnipresent in this age and that is why one of the reasons, followers of Ayya Vazhi, like most Hindus, believe that the current yuga, Kali Yuga is so degraded.
[edit] Buddhism
A "devil"-like figure in Buddhism is Mara. He is a tempter, who also tempted Gautama Buddha by trying to seduce him with the vision of beautiful women who, in various legends, are often said to be Mara's daughters. Mara personifies unskillfulness, the "death" of the spiritual life. He tries to distract humans from practising the spiritual life by making the mundane alluring or the negative seem positive. Another interpretation of Mara is that he is the desires that are present in ones own mind preventing the person from seeing the truth. So in a sense Mara is not an independent being but a part of ones own being that has to be defeated.
[edit] Odu-Ifa
There is no Devil in Ifa. There is Esu or Elegba who is seen as a trickster. Christian missionaries attempted to equate the Devil with Esu. Odu Ifa teaches that "evil" as it were, is the result of the actions of people. Oldumare being omnipotent is capable of being good and evil. Thus in Ifa evil can be seen "relatively" to something else.
[edit] Ancient Egypt
Given that Christianity, Judaism and Islam can find many of their philosophical roots in Ancient Egypt it is not surprising that the devil concept can also be traced back there. While the term "devil" is not used in Ancient Egypt the term Set, the name of Horus' "enemy" lends itself to the character known in the previously mentioned religions "Satan". In the Ausarian drama we find that Ausar (Greek: Osiris) is chopped into 13 pieces by Set. Auset (Isis) collects all of his pieces save his phallus. Horus, son of Ausar and Auset sets out to avenge the death and dismemberment of his father by confronting Set. Horus is victorious over Set and Ausar, being brought back from the dead becomes lord of the underworld. It is this drama that gives us the cosmic conflict between good and evil, evil being embodied by Set. This is not to say that Set was always seen as an evil character in Ancient Egyptian theology. There are many times in Ancient Egyptian history where conflicts between different "houses" lead to the depreciation of one neter relative to another.
As in most polytheistic faiths, the characters involved differentiate themselves from the Western tradition of a devil in that all the gods are closely related. In this case, numerous historic texts suggest that Set is the Uncle or Brother of Horus and in the "defeat" of Set, we see another separation from the norm in the devouring/assimilation of Set into Horus with the result of Horus having depictions of both the falcon head and the (unknown animal) head of Set. This (like Buddhism) represents a dissolution of dichotomy.
[edit] Syncreto-Paganism
In Neopagan religions that have assimilated aspects of Abrahamic mythology into their own pantheons, Satan, Lucifer, and Beelzebub are often seen as distinct and separate beings who perform necessary cosmic functions.[citation needed] In Stregheria, the Lucifer/Satan connection is upheld just as in Christian mythology. The Streghe see Lucifer (the name "Satan" is never used in Stregheria) as a kind and philanthropic deity who chose to disobey the tyrant-god of the Christians by appearing in the form of the serpent to offer knowledge of good and evil to humans (presumably via the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, as this is an allusion to the Genesis myth) in order to expose the Abrahamic God for the evil being he truly was. Stregheria's classical influence is apparent here, as in Greek mythology the serpent was seen as a symbol of wisdom.[citation needed]
[edit] Neopaganism
Christian tradition has frequently identified pagan religions and witchcraft with the influence of Satan. In the Middle Ages, the Church accused alleged witches of consorting and conspiring with Satan. Several modern conservative Christian writers, such as Jack Chick and James Dobson, have depicted today's neopagan and witchcraft religions as explicitly Satanic.
In fact few neopagan traditions recognize Satan or the Devil per se. However, many neopagan groups worship some sort of Horned God, for example as a consort of the Great Goddess in Wicca. These gods usually reflect mythological figures such as Cernunnos or Pan, and any similarity they may have to the Christian Devil seems to date back only to the 19th century, when a Christian reaction to Pan's growing importance in literature and art resulted in his image being translated to that of the Devil.[3]
[edit] New Age movement
Participants in the New Age movement have widely varied views about Satan, the Devil, and so forth. In some forms of Esoteric Christianity Satan remains as a being of evil, or at least a metaphor for sin and materialism, but the most widespread tendency is to deny his existence altogether. Lucifer, on the other hand, in the original Roman sense of "light-bringer", occasionally appears in the literature of certain groups as a metaphorical figure quite distinct from Satan, and without any implications of evil. For example, Theosophy founder Madame Blavatsky named her journal Lucifer since she intended it to be a "bringer of light." Many New Age schools of thought follow a nondualistic philosophy that does not recognise a primal force for evil. Even when a dualistic model is followed, this is more often akin to the Chinese system of yin and yang, in which good and evil are explicitly not a complementary duality. Schools of thought that do stress a spiritual war between good and evil or light and darkness include the philosophy of Rudolf Steiner, Agni Yoga, and the Church Universal and Triumphant.
[edit] Left Hand Path
[edit] Social and Political Uses of the Devil Concept
People put the concept of the Devil to use in social and political conflicts.
[edit] Demonize enemies
People sometimes link their enemies to the Devil. Here are some examples:
Jacques Gruet, one of John Calvin's enemies in Geneva, anonymously attributed Calvin's influence to the devil. He was tortured into confessing and then beheaded.
Against the Roman Papacy, an Institution of the Devil: a pamphlet written by Martin Luther in 1545. Luther likewise was portrayed by the Roman Catholic Church as a disciple of the Devil. [3]
The concept of reason was referred to by Martin Luther as "The Devil's whore".
The Nation of Islam has been known to refer to white Americans as "white devils".
Certain Iranian politicians, religious leaders and others have on numerious occasions referred to the U.S. as the Great Satan, and in recent years to Israel as the Little Satan[citation needed]
On Sept. 21, 2006, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez addressed the United Nations General Assembly and referred to United States President George W. Bush, whom had spoken there the day before, as "the devil." Making the sign of the cross, he continued, "And it smells of sulphur still today." [4] Chavez was widely criticized in the United States after the remark, even by some of the American president's sharpest opponents.[citation needed]
[edit] Explain others’ beliefs
One can use the concept of the Devil to explain why others hold beliefs that one considers to be false and ungodly. This would be considered ad hominem argumentation or attacks. Some examples of the use of this are:
- Fundamentalist pamphleteer Jack Chick portrays Satan as influencing or even controlling the Roman Catholic Church.
- Dr. Henry Morris wrote that Satan originated the concept of evolution. [5]
- The Fundamental Evangelistic Association depicts the Jesus Seminar as inspired not by authentic historical scholarship but by Satan[4].
[edit] Bibliography
- The Origin of Satan, by Elaine Pagels (Vintage Books, New York 1995) explores the development, the "demonization" of the character of Satan against the background of the bitter struggle between the early Church and the Synagogue to be the legitimate heir of ancient Hebrew religious tradition. She discusses how Satan becomes a figure that reflects our own hatreds and prejudices, and the struggle between our loving selves and our fearful, combative selves.
- The Old Enemy: Satan & the Combat Myth, by Neil Forsyth (Princeton, New Jersey, 1987) seeks to show how Satan emerged from ancient mythological traditions and is best understood not as a principle of evil, but as a narrative character in the context of "the Combat Myth". Forsyth tells the Devil's story from the Epic of Gilgamesh through to the writings of St. Augustine.
- The Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive Christianity, by Jeffrey Burton Russell (Meridian, New York 1977) is "a history of the personification of evil" which, to make things clear, he calls "the Devil". Accessible and engaging, full of photographs illustrating the text, this is the first of a four volume series on the history of the concept of the Devil. The following volumes are, Satan: The Early Christian Tradition, Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages, and Mephistopheles: The Devil in the Modern World.
- The Devil in Legend and Literature, by Maximilian Rudwin (Open Court, La Salle, Illinois, 1931, 1959) is a compendium of "the secular and sacred adventures of Satan". Engaging, wide-ranging and good-humored (and out-of-print for thirty years), this "classic" was re-printed in 1989.
[edit] Also known as
|
|
|
[edit] See also
- Devil in fiction
- The Devil (Tarot card)
- Devil worship
- Hierarchy of devils
- Names of the demons
- Satanic Ritual Abuse
- Afterlife
- Exorcism
- Hell, Hades, Underworld
- Inquisition
- Satanism
- Witchcraft
[edit] External links
- Catholic Encyclopedia
- Online Etymology Dictionary
- The Devil - Unjustly Maligned
- What About The Devil?
- The League of Independent Satanists
- The Children of the Devil
- A reconsidersation of Bible passages which refer to the devil
- Transcript of a Biblical debate about the nature of the devil
- Dune & Devil
- The Origin and Fate of Satan
![[3]](http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/2026/luther.gif){kind=link}