Samael Speaks
JoeUser Forums
Page 1 of 6
After I started writing this poem, I thought of retitling this poem as Samael Speaks, reminiscent of Nietzsche's Thus Spake Zarathustra, in which Nietzsche describes his idea of the uber man. As you may know, Nietzsche was a German philosopher in the late nineteenth century. Nietzsche's philosophy criticized Christianity. For example, he wrote that Christianity was too complacent for humans to achieve their full power. The use of Nietzsche's philosophy was reportedly partly responsible for influencing the occurrence of the two world wars in the twentieth century.
As compared to Nietzsche's philosophy, I believe that my poem is a more balanced approach about a religion of good and evil, although this poem favors more the arguments of Samael who is an angelic demon. This poem is about an introduction to, judgment, fall and mission of Samael. In Thus Spake Zarathustra, Zarathustra 'speaks' the words of Friedrich Nietzsche; however, in my poem Samael does not speak my words. I believe that the words in this poem are mostly consistent with the stories and theology of religion.
One reason for writing this poem is a theological reason that claims that people should not refuse to see evil based on the belief that if evil is not acknowledged then perhaps evil will disappear on its own especially when evil is ignored. A few people may believe that unsupporting evil can eventually abolish evil. However in human history, this effort to refuse to acknowledge and support evil and focus only on the good seems to have been at times futile. What happened, as you may have witnessed or read, is that evil sometimes worked best when unrestricted. Instead, what people ought to do is avoid doing evil. Ignoring evil and focusing only on the good can be a type of monism of willful or passionate refusal to accept a type of dualism that describes the simultaneous existence and practice of the opposite and sometime opposing principles of good and evil.
If a person shuns and avoids the sight of evil then that person could be developing a cowardice of evil, although avoiding a confrontation with or against evil that may have unknown or additional bad consequences can be prudent. Also, a person who shuns and avoids the sight of evil can be denying God's truth about the existence of evil, and therefore might allow evil to develop in power and influence, especially as what can happen when people avoid the good responsibilities that they had accepted. A refusal to recognize evil can be a refusal of truth.
Knowing how to deal with evil can hopefully liberate us from evil's burden, whether perhaps a person's mission is a civil mission or a religious mission accepted from God. One way to defeat the evil that is described in this poem is to use truth, and sometime perhaps, more specifically, to outwit evil with truth. From the Catholic catechism numbers 1962 and 2238, God wants us to know evil, including evil that is unknown to our conscience, as a means, when necessary, to protect ourselves from evil, and not to live free as a pretext to do evil. One goal or reward of doing good is for example to maintain beneficial order while resisting the ruinous disorder or the hampering effects of evil.
Another reason for writing this poem is an idea or an observation from Friedrich Nietzsche in Thus Spake Zarathustra, "Let us speak thereof, ye wisest ones, even though it be bad. To be silent is worse; all suppressed truths become poisonous. And let everything break up which can break up by our truths! Many a house is still to be built"! A truth that is not silent in this poem is living a life, either on occasion or permanently, that is different from or in opposition to the type of life that God offers, and therefore risks losing an eternity in heaven.
