Ahzi-Dahaka the 3 Headed Serpent, Review of Koetting’s Evocation

Epic of Persian Kings

I highly advise using actual texts that are respected and apart of the traditional mythology instead of studying a Micheal W Ford book for a month. The Gates of Dozak is not a reference book or mythology book. Mr. Koetting shows his ignorance by his little explanation on Ahzi-Dahaka in the beginning, he didn’t even do a Wiki search. Please review the video above to have accurate information on the mythology of Ahzi-Dahaka. BTW, do I call you Sam or Dean, Mr. Koetting I mean Sam Winchester.

I lose even more respect for Sam, when he is in a kitchen of some sort. Sam got a “ceramic” pot from a mysterious person that thought he should have it. I’ve been around for awhile and no mysterious person has given me anything, hmm sounds like the beginning of a myth to seam oh so mysterious and authoritative. This is a vessel, spoiler, he never even lights this vessel/candle. Anyway, we all are aware of Ford’s affinity for pots in his “ritual” work. The thing that caught my attention was the feather ingredient, because birds are considered ashra. Ashra are the good equivalent to the evil druj. Then the laughable comment about using creepy bugs to bring the “creep” factor in. If your going to use bugs as a factor of conjuration of Nasu, I suggest using bugs that eat the dead, like flies and maggots. I think Sam is scared of maggots. Finally, that self cutting snow job. If Sam’s had a brain, that wasn’t consumed by Ford, he would have used Semen or Period Blood.

I could care less that Sam took a trip out into some dessert in the United States of American. Go to Iran or Iraq, I’d be impressed then, if Sam survived doing that ritual around Muslims that would gain some serious respect by me. Why did he have a stone magic circle? Is he walking into this ritual with fear in is heart? Then outside the circle of protection he had a tiki torches at the 4 corners creating a square of the watch tower. So, it appears to me that he is scared and is using white light protection in the form spiritual geometry, to protect himself. Then he supposedly pulls hair out of his head to corrupt the fire as to open a portal for Ahzi-Dahaka, problem being, Ahzi-Dahaka is not encased in Hell. Polluting the fire of a tiki torch is pretty damn weak representation of this concept because a Zoroastrian altar fire is the center piece of temple that is blessed, prayed over, and taken care of by mobeds who are careful that Atar (Holy Fire) is never corrupted like Anahita (Healing Waters) who then became Jahi. Again, I point out, why was the vessel never lit?


There is Sam Winchester, in clothing, not ritual garb (the wallet chain made that a little obvious.) Playing his voice distorted Ford chants on a mp3 player in the background. Though these are supposed to be ancient prayers, they were written by a living author. So, Sam goes about his ritual and fumble fucks here and there with his ancient tome. Till we get to part where grabs the unlit vessel and kneels down. This was the point where Sam was “possessed” by Lucifer I mean Ahzi-Dahaka. Then we go to the automatic writing scene. I may not be an expert on how the whole automatic writing thing works, but that seemed pretty hokey to me. This sacrifice the blood of a king bullshit refers back the original story of Ahzi-Dahaka as a young prince. I totally agree that none of Ahriman or his men respect or give a damn about Koetting’s tacky and disrespectful display he called a ritual.

Lets take a step back and look into Micheal W Ford and his need to equate all magic in the forms of death throws and necromancy. This only equates in working with the dead whom starve for life as parasites. When looking into the Vedic Hindu aspect of energy transference, its devotional energy that is used to to sustain a daeva. Tantric Hindu teaches how to use sexual energy as a means to exchange energy with a daeva to empower yourself, not by allowing an entity to possess you and learning to live and work with it. If you allow a Persian demon in, prepare yourself for insanity. Then again, I have proven that is what Ford’s magical goals are in the first place. SELF DESTRUCTION!

5 thoughts on “Ahzi-Dahaka the 3 Headed Serpent, Review of Koetting’s Evocation

  1. Baron, we do not corporeally exist osutide of reality. Ergo, all human value judgments must be made on a utilitarian basis. Not doing so is both irrational and counter-productive. Your resort to demanding that a Supreme Being is required to establish moral authority is as irrational and arbitrary, if not more so, than any construct I seek to introduce. Our existence provides indisputable proof that the universe is life oriented. Therefore, whatever controlling set of parameters (e.g., Tao, etc.) that can possibly be conceived of as transcending reality, of standing “outside of the continuum” must be life-oriented as well. If there is to be any definition of good it must be that which is in accordance with the universe’s own construction and operative system. The universe is beyond question a benevolent entity or else something so incredibly unlikely and fragile, such as human life, could not possibly exist.Rape is most clearly not life-oriented. Otherwise, it would be the norm for procreative processes, which it most clearly is not. Continuation of the human species has always depended upon a quasi-benevolent family structure with which rape is not consonant. Nowhere does anyone see any sort of flourishing rape cult or rape-based culture wherein rape is the primary mode of reproductive intercourse. Much to the contrary, cultures within which rape is a relatively dominant interpersonal feature usually tend to display retrogressive characteristics.Perpetration of rape is contrary to that life-orientation which is demanded by the universe of surviving individuals in order to perpetuate their own DNA. Ergo, it is against or contrary to reality. Voiding itself of utilitarian aspect also voids itself of moral aspect as morality must ipso facto be life-oriented and reality-based. The universe and what is consistent with its own operative structure is a de facto handbook of what is moral and immoral. My arguing that is no different but far less arbitrary save to the extent that you regard the universe itself to be arbitrary than adding an entirely unnecessary layer of construct required to posit the existence of a Supreme Being and, by subsequent extension, morality. As to suggestions that my position on rape is exceedingly yin, the superior (yang) man has no need to commit rape, does not need to initiate violence and eschews such senseless barbarity. Term that as yin if you so desire but you would be exceedingly wrong in doing so.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.