The Second Apocalypse

Earwa => The Aspect-Emperor => The Unholy Consult => Topic started by: Yellow on July 07, 2017, 11:17:44 am

Title: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Yellow on July 07, 2017, 11:17:44 am
Ok, what do we know about the Daimos? It's not really been described in any detail, from what I can tell. We see a few things it gets used for throughout the 7 books, but I have no real feel for how it works. You could say the same about the Aporos (apart from that it's about contradictions), but I don't see that as playing a big role in the series.

Can anyone enlighten me?

I guess if people want to refer to...

(click to show/hide)

...they should probably use spoiler tags.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Wilshire on July 07, 2017, 04:29:27 pm
The best we've got about it are probably from Iyokus.



Aporos is a dead branch of magic that, imo, functioned similarly to the other gnostic magery, except that the end result stops other magic. In my head, it makes sense to me that an aporatic practitioner could practice no other forms of sorcery.
Keep in mind during that Nonman times, there were many branches of sorcery beyond just Cants and Wards.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Asmodeus van Yakshas on July 07, 2017, 10:04:08 pm
There also seems to be an element of necromancy to the Daimos. Kellhus used the Daimos when he decapitated Malowebi and preserved the head in a concious state.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: themerchant on July 08, 2017, 01:10:22 am
Don't think there is a limit, Iyokus seems to command 3 of them in TTT. We get his voice through Zioz, but the other two react to his commands as well.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Wilshire on July 11, 2017, 05:40:34 pm
There also seems to be an element of necromancy to the Daimos. Kellhus used the Daimos when he decapitated Malowebi and preserved the head in a concious state.
Welcome to the forum, and good point.

Don't think there is a limit, Iyokus seems to command 3 of them in TTT. We get his voice through Zioz, but the other two react to his commands as well.
Right, forgot about that.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Cüréthañ on July 11, 2017, 09:53:04 pm
In the glossary it's refered to as Noömancy.
'Noos' is from the greek, for mind.

Baker has revealed an interest in the noosphere before.

noosphere
ˈnəʊəsfɪə
noun
noun: noosphere; plural noun: noospheres

a postulated sphere or stage of evolutionary development dominated by consciousness, the mind, and interpersonal relationships.
"creatures evolve: a new biosphere emerges, and with it a new noosphere"

Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Elju on July 18, 2017, 06:46:25 pm
This is slightly off topic, but my question is related to the Daimos so it seems appropriate to post here:

I may have read these passages too quickly but it seemed like
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Walter on July 18, 2017, 06:58:00 pm
No, Kellhus was possessed by Ajokli, this daemon was, I think Kakliol?  Big time Ciphrang, clearly, but not on the level of the Hundred.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: themerchant on July 18, 2017, 07:15:37 pm
yeah as soon as it got to the arc, it became whole again probably due to the nearness of hell there as it's the ultimate topoi.

Same happened with Kellhus is my guess when he stepped into the portal , Ajokli took over. Kellhus was already using dog powers at the last whelming, levitating without use of sorcery etc.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Elju on July 18, 2017, 09:02:19 pm
I was thinking that maybe the lesser Ciphrang was impersonating Ajokli and that maybe everyone misunderstood what was possessing Kelhus.

If not, those passages seem odd (if I'm remembering them correctly). Why is it significant that a Ciphrang snuffed Ioykus? Does that demon show up again later?
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: profgrape on July 18, 2017, 09:29:55 pm
I don't have my ARC anymore but when I first read the section with the Ciphrang I was convinced that the "Reaper of Souls" was Gilgaol.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: MSJ on July 19, 2017, 04:30:47 am
I was thinking that maybe the lesser Ciphrang was impersonating Ajokli and that maybe everyone misunderstood what was possessing Kelhus.

If not, those passages seem odd (if I'm remembering them correctly). Why is it significant that a Ciphrang snuffed Ioykus? Does that demon show up again later?

Because, the Ciphrang is summoned against his will and doesn't particularly like being outside The Outside. So, he kills Iyokus when he gets the chance. I think the one in TTT wanted to kill him also. And being near such a huge Topos kinda broke the chains from Iyokus, is how I took it.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Madness on July 19, 2017, 02:57:35 pm
Welcome to the Second Apocalypse, Asmodeus van Yakshas.

On topic, Kalakiol (sp?) is a cipher for what happens later with Kellhus.

I'm fairly sure this is one of the more serious misreadings concerning around the events of Kellhus' trip to the Court of Sil. In my opinion, a completely different version of events falls out of attributing all dialogue by Kellhus in the Golden Room to Ajokli, up to and including Kelmomas' interruption of Ajokli's God-Mode.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: greenshift on July 19, 2017, 05:31:17 pm
Madness's post hit on an something that I had been wondering about (enough so that I finally registered to post).

After the Ajokli reveal with Kellhus I immediately reconsidered his dialogue with that in mind. To me it was clear that the "descending as a hunger" comment was how Ajokli perceived himself through the Inverse Fire, not Kellhus. That fits extremely well with how we've seen Ajokli described previously. As far as I'm concerned we don't know what Kellhus himself would see when looking into the IF. It seems a common opinion on this forum to attribute the above to Kellhus, but I feel that is mistaken and I've wondered why I haven't seen the Ajokli interpretation pushed more often.

And I'm probably getting a little off-topic (apologies), but I'm also curious if Kelmomas happened to look into the IF while he was in the Golden room and what he would see if he did. Presumably he wouldn't be affected the same as others? Considering how the No-God is invisible to the Outside, he wouldn't see himself suffering damnation, correct? If not, then what would he see? Also, would Samarmas still inhabiting Kelmomas change this somehow? If there are two souls in a body then what would that person see in the IF (especially if one of the two is the No-God)? Not sure if we'll ever see this one answered or if its even relevant, just something I was debating with myself.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Madness on July 19, 2017, 05:49:48 pm
Madness's post hit on an something that I had been wondering about (enough so that I finally registered to post).

Welcome to the Second Apocalypse, greenshift :).

After the Ajokli reveal with Kellhus I immediately reconsidered his dialogue with that in mind. To me it was clear that the "descending as a hunger" comment was how Ajokli perceived himself through the Inverse Fire, not Kellhus. That fits extremely well with how we've seen Ajokli described previously. As far as I'm concerned we don't know what Kellhus himself would see when looking into the IF. It seems a common opinion on this forum to attribute the above to Kellhus, but I feel that is mistaken and I've wondered why I haven't seen the Ajokli interpretation pushed more often.

People are fixated on Kellhus. But yeah, I really do think it's very interesting to reread that section as Ajokli speaking. I will have more thoughts when I read the canon artifact so I can quote accurately.

And I'm probably getting a little off-topic (apologies), but I'm also curious if Kelmomas happened to look into the IF while he was in the Golden room and what he would see if he did. Presumably he wouldn't be affected the same as others? Considering how the No-God is invisible to the Outside, he wouldn't see himself suffering damnation, correct? If not, then what would he see? Also, would Samarmas still inhabiting Kelmomas change this somehow? If there are two souls in a body then what would that person see in the IF (especially if one of the two is the No-God)? Not sure if we'll ever see this one answered or if its even relevant, just something I was debating with myself.

Not something I've seen asked but a very interesting question. Maybe he saw himself, maybe Samarmus was inhabiting the body at the time.

That's another thing I'm very interested in rereading TAE with in mind - when is it Samarmas and when is it Kelmomas?
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Walter on July 19, 2017, 06:22:47 pm
I think it's as simple as 'Ajokli speaks in bold font.'
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: MSJ on July 19, 2017, 08:42:04 pm
Reply function not working, :(. Walter I agree, its that simple, the bolded is Ajokli. Though he begins to inhabit Kellhus before his bragadocious speech to the Mutilated. He left Kellhus when he didn't see Kel but heard his voice and new something was up. The "Kel, what are you..", then salted tells me Kellhus was wearing his own head and got salted. Regardless, his soul passed to the Outside prior to the resurrection of the No-God, so he's Outside. And, in my mind, still in the game. Kellhus is not hanging from a belt. Ajokli left him the moment Kel appeared.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: greenshift on July 19, 2017, 08:55:24 pm
I think it's as simple as 'Ajokli speaks in bold font.'

Don't we get examples of Kellhus doing seemingly magically acts without sorcery before the speech starts to use bold font? I don't have the book in front of me at the moment to confirm one way or the other. If so that would suggest that Ajokli was in control of Kellhus before we start seeing the bold font. Also, if the Golden room is invisible to the gods, then how would Ajokli be able to posses Kellhus without being able to observe him? As the Dunsult note he could not be seen there by the gods normally. This isn't a problem if we assume he has possessed Kellhus before he enters the room. The only other option I see is that Kellhus would somehow have needed to switch his own head with Ajokli's after being in the room without anyone noticing or commenting. I have a hard time believing that given the amount of scrutiny he is likely receiving at that time, unless...some sort of magical chicanery that we aren't privy to is at play which is somewhat unsatisfying.

And as I mentioned in earlier post, the description of a 'descending hunger' sounds A LOT like how Ajokli has been portrayed so far (raiding the granary and all). The bold font hadn't started at that point and I very strongly suspect that was Ajokli talking.

I rule out Kellhus being on the Outside by the fact that Ajokli can not find him after the salting. If Kellhus was dead and on the Outside then Ajokli could see him and there is no reason for the Cnaiur possession. Even if we suppose Cnaiur was possessed by Gilgaol instead, then that still leaves the problem as to why he can't see Kellhus on the Outside.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: MSJ on July 19, 2017, 09:01:07 pm
As to Ajokli not being able to find him, I think it leans on Kellhus's mastery of the Daimos. I said in my earlier post, Kellhus's spot in the Outside is described as nothing like the hells he visited earlier. I find it concivible that he has created his own little spot in the Outside, away from the scrutiny of the 100.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: MSJ on July 19, 2017, 09:10:59 pm
Quote from:  greenshift
After the Ajokli reveal with Kellhus I immediately reconsidered his dialogue with that in mind. To me it was clear that the "descending as a hunger" comment was how Ajokli perceived himself through the Inverse Fire, not Kellhus. That fits extremely well with how we've seen Ajokli described previously. As far as I'm concerned we don't know what Kellhus himself would see when looking into the IF. It seems a common opinion on this forum to attribute the above to Kellhus, but I feel that is mistaken and I've wondered why I haven't seen the Ajokli interpretation pushed more often.

This aligns very well with my thoughts that Kellhus is indeed on the Outside, but not in the Hells. He's created his own nook and cranny away from the scrutiny of the 100. A most serene place from the dreams throughout the series.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Madness on July 19, 2017, 10:46:19 pm
Reply function not working, :(.

I'm not having problem but my membership category is different. Still an issue?
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: MSJ on July 19, 2017, 11:44:23 pm
Quote from:  Madness
I'm not having problem but my membership category is different. Still an issue?

This is from Quick Reply with me copying and pasting and doing the quoting. If I choose the quote feature, I just get blank where I should be able to post with the quote. Matter of fact, Quick Reply is only thing working for me.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: themerchant on July 20, 2017, 01:15:48 pm
Serwe is a ciphrang as well as seen by Mimara.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: themerchant on July 20, 2017, 01:17:35 pm
I think it's as simple as 'Ajokli speaks in bold font.'

Don't we get examples of Kellhus doing seemingly magically acts without sorcery before the speech starts to use bold font?

We do, Kel notices that Kellhus is levitating without any sorcery, during the last whelming(last one, kellhus knew ;) ) Which sort of reminded me of the Wheel of time, one power and true power distinction. One can be sensed one can't.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: themerchant on July 20, 2017, 08:01:11 pm
No i believe the phrase is a ciphrang for serwe from Mimara's point of view.

"sees a slender Ciphrang hanging as high as the future,showering the earth with death- a witch ,wet with the fires of damnation, burns heaped upon her burns"

No real discernible difference between caps apart from No-God being all caps and bold, Cnaiur/ajokli being all caps but not bold and everyone else as bold.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: themerchant on July 21, 2017, 04:51:52 pm
I don't retain page numbers just the text like Kissault(sp? Subon's groom) with the Tractate. Plus not an exact quote.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Walter on July 21, 2017, 05:41:48 pm
There's a bit earlier on where Maithanet is talking to Esme about why the Gods would be against them.  He points out that during the Apocalypse people cried out to the Gods, and the answers that they got back didn't acknowledge the No-God or his monsters at all.  I take this to mean that the Gods can act during the apocalypse, they are just rendered idiotic and bewildered by the fact that the most important thing in the world is hidden from them.

Witness Ajokli walking Cnaiur's body into the tornado, only to see nothing.  It wasn't even clear that he saw the Sranc.  They just parted around him, right?  I'm not a hundred percent clear he saw the Skin Spies, and wasn't just slamming the chorae down on general principle.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Madness on July 21, 2017, 05:47:02 pm
I don't retain page numbers just the text like Kissault(sp? Subon's groom) with the Tractate. Plus not an exact quote.

Kussalt*

*"I carry it here," taps heart*

There's a bit earlier on where Maithanet is talking to Esme about why the Gods would be against them.  He points out that during the Apocalypse people cried out to the Gods, and the answers that they got back didn't acknowledge the No-God or his monsters at all.  I take this to mean that the Gods can act during the apocalypse, they are just rendered idiotic and bewildered by the fact that the most important thing in the world is hidden from them.

Witness Ajokli walking Cnaiur's body into the tornado, only to see nothing.  It wasn't even clear that he saw the Sranc.  They just parted around him, right?  I'm not a hundred percent clear he saw the Skin Spies, and wasn't just slamming the chorae down on general principle.

+1
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: TheCulminatingApe on July 21, 2017, 08:42:16 pm
The Daimos is not simply about summoning Ciphrang, perhaps we should look more closely at it's metaphysical attributes.

Something I noted from the glossary

"elhusioli The daimos of excess.  As per standard Kiunnat metaphysics, souls directly move other souls, impart the imprint of daimos upon another daimos.  Some, such as terror or enthusiasm, are set apart for the dramatic nature of their effect."

It seems that there is both Daimos as sorcery, and daimos as a concept.  The Ordeal seems to experience extremes of excess, terror and enthusiasm at various times.  Does the intense emotional experiences of thousands and thousands of Ordealmen provide momentum for Kellhus or Ajokli?

Also I note the contrast with the extreme dispassion of the Dunyain, who seek to become self-moving souls
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Yellow on July 22, 2017, 08:46:37 am
Good catch. So Daimos is a principle, like Logos or ...phusis(?) - sorry, can't remember what the "physical" principle was called, as referred to by Crabicus in TGO. Also, there's the Psukhe, of course, for emotions.

This had never occurred to me before, so I just went and looked up Logos in wiki, which led me to an entry on Heraclitus, which had the following quote:

Quote
Ethos anthropoi daimon, "character is fate"

This influential quote by Heraclitus "ἦθος ἀνθρώπῳ δαίμων" (DK 22B119) has led to numerous interpretations. Whether in this context, "daimon" can indeed be translated to mean "fate" is disputed; however, it lends much sense to Heraclitus' observations and conclusions about human nature in general. While the translation with "fate" is generally accepted as in Kahn's "a man's character is his divinity", in some cases, it may also stand for the soul of the departed.

So I take it the daimos is the principle or nature of souls and the Outside. And the Daimos as a sorcery technique is simply the mastery of the daimos as a principle.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Cüréthañ on July 22, 2017, 02:48:01 pm
I think you are quite right. Given that sorcery also depends on the Outside for power, there is an argument for it to be classified as of a kind.

Other points;

In the Knife of Many Hands we learn that a Ciphrang can be implanted in 'special' humans (specifically a Holga or whatever they are called) and does not leave a Mark.

Practioners (Iyokos) may be blind. Like Chisaurim.

It seems to be at least similar to power that Outside agencies use given the two way connection between ciphrang and summoner.

Prime difference seem to be that it does not use language to hinge meaning. Should we regard language as an intrinsic part of sorcery, I wonder?

It seems reasonable to suggest that Seswatha's Heart is diamotic by effect.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Yellow on July 22, 2017, 05:34:56 pm
Wow, never connected Seswatha's heart with the Daimos, but thinking about it, it makes perfect sense. Maybe Kellhus is controlling Akka's dreams through the Daimos?

Need to re-read KOMH, don't remember that aspect of it you mentioned. :)

Edit: I wouldn't label language as an intrinsic part of sorcery at all, just one of the methods one can use. The correlation between meaning and language makes it very useful and teachable, since it is intellect-dependent.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Madness on July 23, 2017, 02:09:31 pm
The Daimos is not simply about summoning Ciphrang, perhaps we should look more closely at it's metaphysical attributes.

Something I noted from the glossary

"elhusioli The daimos of excess.  As per standard Kiunnat metaphysics, souls directly move other souls, impart the imprint of daimos upon another daimos.  Some, such as terror or enthusiasm, are set apart for the dramatic nature of their effect."

It seems that there is both Daimos as sorcery, and daimos as a concept.  The Ordeal seems to experience extremes of excess, terror and enthusiasm at various times.  Does the intense emotional experiences of thousands and thousands of Ordealmen provide momentum for Kellhus or Ajokli?

Also I note the contrast with the extreme dispassion of the Dunyain, who seek to become self-moving souls

I can't wait to dig into the Expanded Glossary. This helps to understand Cüréthañ's perspective more.

Good catch. So Daimos is a principle, like Logos or ...phusis(?) - sorry, can't remember what the "physical" principle was called, as referred to by Crabicus in TGO. Also, there's the Psukhe, of course, for emotions.

This had never occurred to me before, so I just went and looked up Logos in wiki, which led me to an entry on Heraclitus, which had the following quote:

Quote
Ethos anthropoi daimon, "character is fate"

This influential quote by Heraclitus "ἦθος ἀνθρώπῳ δαίμων" (DK 22B119) has led to numerous interpretations. Whether in this context, "daimon" can indeed be translated to mean "fate" is disputed; however, it lends much sense to Heraclitus' observations and conclusions about human nature in general. While the translation with "fate" is generally accepted as in Kahn's "a man's character is his divinity", in some cases, it may also stand for the soul of the departed.

So I take it the daimos is the principle or nature of souls and the Outside. And the Daimos as a sorcery technique is simply the mastery of the daimos as a principle.

Very cool, Yellow.

In the Knife of Many Hands we learn that a Ciphrang can be implanted in 'special' humans (specifically a Holga or whatever they are called) and does not leave a Mark.

Hmm... This is what you perceive that Shinurta did to Ratakila? Interesting.

If you haven't read Bakker's latest, The Carathayan, yet, Cüréthañ, FB thinks there's some Ciphrang related nuggets therein as well.

Wow, never connected Seswatha's heart with the Daimos, but thinking about it, it makes perfect sense.

Interesting.
Title: Re: [TUC Spoilers] (or maybe not) - The Daimos
Post by: Wilshire on July 24, 2017, 04:58:29 pm
Topic was split. Discussions related to this topic about the Diamos, please continue. Digression topics related Ajokli/Kellhus/Kelmomas please continue  here: Ajokli and the metaphysical whodunit (http://www.second-apocalypse.com/index.php?topic=2257.0).

Thanks.