Lilith is a modern invention

[FireBorn]

I’m curious what wound drives someone to speak so absolutely about a specific spirit in the occult, especially one like Lilith. Why her? Why so much effort to discredit her?

Couldn’t the same be said for every Abrahamic current? Or every grimoire built atop older pantheons that were absorbed, distorted, or rewritten?

I mean, careful now, I could dismantle the entirety of the Abrahamic mythos, historically and ritually, from top to bottom. And I could do it clean. But to what end? What’s gained by that?

Does it feed your magic? Does it improve your results? Or is this just another thought exercise dressed up like depth?

If Lilith is fake to you, don’t invoke her. Simple.

But where exactly do we stop when this kind of attack gets framed as critical thinking? What counts as an “authorized lineage” in the occult, anyway? Whose stamp are you waiting for?

 

[Faria]

bitter desert warlocks.

Sorry to nit-pick, but this "desert" thing bugs me as a frequent diminutive applied to Bible stuff. Yes, most of the modern Middle East is a desert. Some of the ancient Middle East was a desert in ancient times. But the Bible? It's Greek. Maybe we could say "eastern Mediterranean," but still, basically Greek. The stories in the Bible are about people who lived in the desert, but the culture behind its creation and transmission were a sea-faring trading people who valued knowledge and writing.

But on the irrelevance of the Bible's version of the Eden story to reality? Yeah, we agree there.

 

[Evara]

I like how you didn't dispute the "bitter warlock" part.

"bitter warlocks from a diverse geographical region"

There, better?

 

[Faria]

I’m curious what wound drives someone to speak so absolutely about a specific spirit in the occult, especially one like Lilith. Why her? Why so much effort to discredit her?

Lilith, more than most other feminine spirits/deities, has a special place of reverence in contemporary culture, especially along occultists. Almost any other deity, there is a mountain of evidence that such a thing existed as an object of devotion at some time, somewhere. The details are often sketchy, but nobody denies the existence of Hera-worship or Isis-worship, or hundreds of other types of spirits from all religions.

I contend that Lilith is not pagan at all, but (like Satan) is actually just a character within the Judeo-Christian religion, and that it is hypocritical to attempt to escape or reject Christianity while praying to one of its components. And I think that is a trap laid by design, marketed to women falling out of Judaism and Christianity. Lilith fan base allows people to think they've created distance from the cult when in fact they are going deeper into it, following an idea whose skeleton is entirely controlled by Bible doctrine no matter what they might point at in terms of archaeology.

 

[FireBorn]

You don't believe in her. That’s clear.
But threads like this aren’t about Lilith. They’re about why her presence threatens something in you.

 

[Wintruz]

I’m curious what wound drives someone to speak so absolutely about a specific spirit in the occult, especially one like Lilith. Why her? Why so much effort to discredit her?

Couldn’t the same be said for every Abrahamic current? Or every grimoire built atop older pantheons that were absorbed, distorted, or rewritten?

I mean, careful now, I could dismantle the entirety of the Abrahamic mythos, historically and ritually, from top to bottom. And I could do it clean. But to what end? What’s gained by that?

Does it feed your magic? Does it improve your results? Or is this just another thought exercise dressed up like depth?

If Lilith is fake to you, don’t invoke her. Simple.

But where exactly do we stop when this kind of attack gets framed as critical thinking? What counts as an “authorized lineage” in the occult, anyway? Whose stamp are you waiting for?

What is the virtue in molly-coddling? Relativism is as capable of becoming an emotional crutch as absolutism and it's much more corrosive long-term.

Rooted in experience (ie: sorting through their emails to a group), a significant number of those interested in Lilith (and similar Qlippoth-derived forms) are on the younger side, probably first looking at some of the "darker" currents of magic and are therefore unlikely to have the historical grounding that occult authors either themselves do not have or, if they do, conveniently don't draw anyone's attention to.

OP is simply saying it's possible to work with gods which do not have to go through the distorted filter of Jewish demonology first. That's healthy.

 

[Faria]

You don't believe in her. That’s clear.
But threads like this aren’t about Lilith. They’re about why her presence threatens something in you.

I'm not threatened by Lilith or by Lilith believers. As far as I can tell, this specific thread is about gaps in the Lilith story. Anyone who is over the top for Lilith should have done some homework before getting on the bandwagon.

If someone wants to commit themselves to a Babylonian deity, Ishtar seems the obvious choice. There's good reason to believe people literally lived and died for the sake of Ishtar. And plenty of other goddesses around the world since forever. So... why is it so popular to be all-in for something made up by medieval rabbis?

 

[StarOfSitra]

The same situation exists for Satanism. You've got 3500+ years of mythology, with deities representing every facet of human philosophy, but people want to escape Christianity by embracing a major Bible character?

Almost all of it, the Satanism and the Lilith thing, is just a fancy way of saying, "I refuse do do what you want me to do." And it's never just beliefs. There's a fashion aesthetic, a lifestyle, a whole selection of tastes and attitudes that goes along with it, and the single defining character of those is rejection of the majority norms.

It's not enough to reject what you don't like and embrace something better. The people who you are rejecting have to know you're doing it, and not like it, or the rebellion doesn't count.

I don’t understand your point with that comment. The name “Satan” comes from the word meaning “adversary.” The adversary archetype has always existed — we can easily see an example in Prometheus, who stole fire from the gods to give it to humanity. Satan is not an invention of the Bible; it’s simply a word representing an archetype. But that’s not the case with Lilith — she’s a created character. Definitely not the same.

 

[FireBorn]

I think we’re talking past each other. I’m not asking for validation, Lilith doesn’t need it, and neither do I. What I’m pointing at is the pattern: threads like this don’t arise in neutral space. They arise when something in a living current feels like it’s moving without permission.

If someone prefers Ishtar, cool. Walk with her. But if you’re threatened by those who are claimed by Lilith… maybe sit with why you need her discredited in the first place.

And if we’re going to call out "emotional crutches," let’s talk about the need to gatekeep the gods.

 

[StarOfSitra]

The artificial creation is turning some random air spirits and a poem about owls into the matriarch of the occult feminist movement. Virtually everything the Lilith crowd mistakenly adores about Lilith can be said about Ishtar with no mistake. The difference is that Lilith is sourced from within the Judeo-Christian canon and represents a rejection of the same.

That's the point I'm trying to make.

 

[Faria]

Satan is not an invention of the Bible;

Without Christianity, there would never have been anything like "Satanism." The identity and character of Satan, the Devil, Old Scratch, etc. is entirely Christian. It may have drawn from diverse non-Christian sources, but Satan is exclusively Christian. I don't mean general personifications of evil, but The Devil. The relationship between God and Satan is something exclusively defined by Christian doctrine in so many forms, it has no direct parallel in Greek, Babylonian, Hinduism, etc other religions.

My point is that people who flock to Lilith cultism as a way to give the finger to the Bible-dominated small town where they grew up are similar to the people who (back in my day) did the same thing with Satanism. They think they are exiting Christianity, but they are instead just exploring one of the spinoffs.

 

[Wintruz]

And if we’re going to call out "emotional crutches," let’s talk about the need to gatekeep the gods.

Or, indeed, the need to reduce symbolic precision down to feeling "threatened".

 

[Beyond Everything]

I'd make the argument that ive never met a lilithaboo that wasnt an absolute neurotic mess of a person.

I used to talk with Karl Welz, and he'd utilize Lilith in his workings. He was probably more successful financially than the people commenting here and was very stable and very intelligent (he was fluent in like 8 languages). Now, I consider there to be huge drawbacks with getting close to any of these egregores -which I've outlined elsewhere- but this is some counter-evidence.

 

[FireBorn]

Or, indeed, the need to reduce symbolic precision down to feeling "threatened".

This is starting to feel less like it’s about the thread and more like it’s about me. If that’s the case, I’m happy to spar it out in DMs instead, cleaner ground.

 

[MorganBlack]

Damn. I really despise people who try turn to magic into a religion. Mythic literalists are a cancer.

This will satisfy nobody, so take it as you will. In the Grimorium Verum "Lilith" may appear there as "Billet" and who a very important demon, judging solely on how frequently "her" name is used in many grimiores. "Billet" is a could be argued as a corruption or variation of "Lilith" - grimoires often Latinized, Frenchified, or corrupted Hebrew/Aramaic names.

Is she literally a Babylonian desert illness spirit. Doubtful. Is there some of her DNA still in there. Maybe? But she is who she is for anyone who calls her.

 

[Wintruz]

This is starting to feel less like it’s about the thread and more like it’s about me. If that’s the case, I’m happy to spar it out in DMs instead, cleaner ground.

Not in the slightest. I don't know you from Adam.

However, I do take objection to your attempt at gaslighting the OP (trying to tell her she's "threatened") when she's simply having a conversation about how she's found working with gods in their original forms, and not their distortions, cleaner and more fulfilling.

If you disagree with her, great. Have it out. But don't attempt to pseudo-psychoanalyse people who are being open from behind your keyboard.

 

[StarOfSitra]

Not in the slightest. I don't know you from Adam.

However, I do take objection to your attempt at gaslighting the OP (trying to tell her she's "threatened") when she's simply having a conversation about how she's found working with gods in their original forms, and not their distortions, cleaner and more fulfilling.

If you disagree with her, great. Have it out. But don't attempt to pseudo-psychoanalyse people who are being open from behind your keyboard.

Don’t worry. I’ve presented some facts that are real — the modern origin of Lilith in a Jewish satire. Then I asked a question, and I’m not the one who got upset. It’s not my fault that people start deifying literary figures or movie characters (which, in the end, will probably happen). I don’t understand why, instead of debating the roots and the substantial facts of the thread, some people go off on tangents with other absurd matters.

The one who gets upset is the person who tries to defend a position without arguments. That’s where ideology comes in, and they must have their reasons for glorifying a literary deity who represents the first divorced woman — maybe they identify with her, or maybe they’re people who don’t believe in deities and their energies but work with psychological archetypes. That, I won’t get involved in.

 

[FireBorn]

Don’t worry. I’ve presented some facts that are real — the modern origin of Lilith in a Jewish satire. Then I asked a question, and I’m not the one who got upset. It’s not my fault that people start deifying literary figures or movie characters (which, in the end, will probably happen). I don’t understand why, instead of debating the roots and the substantial facts of the thread, some people go off on tangents with other absurd matters.

The one who gets upset is the person who tries to defend a position without arguments. That’s where ideology comes in, and they must have their reasons for glorifying a literary deity who represents the first divorced woman — maybe they identify with her, or maybe they’re people who don’t believe in deities and their energies but work with psychological archetypes. That, I won’t get involved in.

I’m not upset, just offering a few counterpoints that feel worth stating clearly.

First, everything we do in this space is fundamentally subjective. No deity, spirit, or current can be proven as objectively real, not Lilith, not Enochian angels, not ancient gods. So I find it strange when one particular figure is singled out as illegitimate (or spoken of as less than), while others with equally murky origins are embraced without question.

If someone’s framework requires historical lineage and textual continuity in order to work with a spirit, that’s a valid and consistent standard. I have no issue with that. It’s when that standard gets selectively applied that things get murky.

For me personally, Lilith isn’t a deity I worship. I don’t bow or kneel. I don’t even engage with the Abrahamic framework at all, it doesn’t speak to me. But I do work with Lilith directly, and I experience her as something older, more primal. That’s not a claim of fact, just my own gnosis.

I also agree that the pop cultural versions of Lilith as a feminist icon or orgy-summoning succubus don’t resonate with me either. There’s a lot of noise out there, but I think everyone here is capable of separating fluff from substance in their own way.

 

[Lurker]

There is a common thread in Lilith's provenance. In the Sumerian myth "The Huluppa Tree", she made her home in in the trunk of a huluppa tree that belonged to Inanna. A snake that could not be charmed also made its home in the roots of the tree, and an Anzu-bird set its young on the branches.

Inanna complained to Gilgamesh, so he bashed the snake. The Anzu-bird flew off with its young. Lilith smashed her home and ". . . fled to the wild, uninhabited places."*

So, in both myths, Sumerian and Jewish, she seems to represent a wild and lawless feminine archetype more at home with wild animals than someone trying to impose order.

*c.f. Inanna by Wokstein and Kramer

Was she a goddess? It's unclear, because that particular story is so short, and she didn't appear again in Sumerian mythology. But clearly it's a typical myth with gods walking the Earth, so it's possible.

 

[Faria]

There is a common thread in Lilith's provenance. In the Sumerian myth "The Huluppa Tree"

Well, sort of? Maybe? Or maybe not.

Kramer and Wokstein (were both Jewish?) want you to see this Jewish figure inserted into Gilgamesh. Their translation is from the 19th century.

In the last 150 years, the study of ancient languages has advanced. Do the scholars still agree that "dark maid Lilith" belongs in that verse?