A Treatise About Vampires

Heck, since there seems to be on going conversation about the vampires on here in ATS, I'll contribute as well as I've given some thought on the matter. This 'thought' has been there for years already, but I never really bothered to type it down, so I'll might aswell do it right now!

Feel free to laugh at my face if you believe that vampires do not exists or they are something else that I think them to be. I won't get offended. This is an opinion after all...

So, I hope this preceeding lenghty text will help out some of ye sincere vampire hunters out there

Something that can be considered as introduction

By the view of science and common people, there are not such creatures as vampires; blood sucking, charming and un-dead - creatures of great evilness, yet they look exactly like us, but they suffer greatly in sun light. No, of course there are no such creatures of literal interpretation. However, we must be looking on allegorical and metaphorical meanings of those ‘properties’, that are connected to the mythological vampire. Here in this short treatise, I will unveil these metaphorical ‘properties’ of these metaphysical creatures, and in doing so, I must conclude that in a certain sense, vampires do exist, in my opinion

First we must acknowledge that the stories and teachings do change due the time. Take that classical rumour as example: You tell some specific message to someone, and he tells it forth to someone as he recalls the story, and so on and so on; eventually the o®iginal message has twisted into something barely recognizable and unfamiliar, even into something incomprehensible. In same manner the truth about vampires has changed due the time: The meaning of this highly symbolical description of state of soul has been twisted into some fantasy creature, and then used merely to tickle imagination. Well be afraid, vampires exists! They are not fantasy creatures of imagination, but real monsters that can overcome and infect anybody but the most strong in faith.

I start explaining this conception by listing the properties of mythological vampire and then explaining how these properties are meant to be interpret to be comprehensible for common sense.

(i) Bloodsucking

We all know what the physical blood is; it is of course the red liquid substance that circulates in our system transporting necessary elements of life around our body. Without the blood circulation, we couldn’t live, therefore ‘blood’ is often referred as ‘life-force’. Now this is interesting because blood can be as well understood metaphorically as life-force in the certain way, that the life-force doesn’t mean same as physical blood. Life-force is the energy or the ‘will’ that binds material together as to living organism. Vampires in literature and media are of course blood suckers. They suck blood with the help of their pointy teeth that penetrate the skin inflicting a visible wound where the blood can be sucked from.

However, our metaphysical and very real vampires do not suck your blood, but your life-force. They metaphorically ‘penetrate your skin’, which means that they overcome your mental protections and your will ‘by their pointy teeth’, which refers to any method to get one hooked into something sinister. Then they literally suck your life-force away through that wound: They do it by making you act on their will - they are the puppet masters to whom rhythms you sway. And how do they control you? This will be explained on following paragraphs.

(ii) Vampiric Charm

Vampires in literature are known to possess evil forces of magick that can charm ordinary people and make them act according the Vampire’s will. They charm you by staring fixed in your eyes and you staring fixed back to them, until you are possessed by their evil will. This basically means same as you would be interested in something, you’d ‘stare’ at it, meaning that you’d be focused in it. Hence, focusing into something that has been laid there by ‘Vampire’, you’d quite likely fall into their charm and you would therefore be ready to be sucked.

Vampires very well know what intrigues people (their prey). It is wealth, glamour, popularity, good food, fast cars, lethal weapons, all the new toys etc. In other words, all that is mundane and has value in the eyes of shallow people. So the Vampires give you a glimpse of these nice stuffs that you want and you’ll do almost anything to get your hands on them; you’ll sacrifice your life, your family and your health to work in some horrible conditions around the clock to get your hands on these Vampiric Charms. Or then they just give you a loan and bang, you’re in their charms again!

It is due this slavery that you will give your life-force to them, making them grow and more powerful. They are those secular and shallow little things that lure you away from real values which lasts test of time, and it is them that bring you under the spell of the Vampires. This is why I earlier said, that only those strong in faith cannot be affected by Vampires. Because those that are strong in faith (not necessarily of some certain religion, but strong spirited) are not easily strayed by mundane profanities.

[edit on 26-9-2008 by v01i0]

(iii) Vampiric Domination

Once you have fallen under their charm and they has penetrated your skin, you are giving your life-force away. Almost all people in modern societies are dominated in some extent. Do you work hard to meet your living expenses? Why do you have such high living expenses at first hand? Do you really need that fancy car and that swimming pool and thousand acres of land? Have you perhaps fallen into the charm of Vampires, and are now paying the price dearly by the expense of your health and willpower? You dream about winning from Lotto so that you would’ve never work again-- well, keep dreaming I say. It can happen, but will it ever happen to you? Until then, you work as their slave because of your own lust; and that is our next issue.

(iv) Vampiric Infection

In literature there are many ways to become infected and eventually to become Vampire oneself. The most popular method is by getting bitten. This isn’t sufficient though. You actually need to drink the blood of Vampire to become one - as in Bram Stoker’s Dracula for example. This means -when interpreted without the veil of allegory - that one has to taste how it is like to dominate others. One has to taste from Vampiric powers and adapt in to that. This also means, that you have to be in favour of some Vampire that is superior to you. In practice it means that you have to lick asses of your bosses to become anything - in order to climb the stairs of corruption and sin.

Don’t worry if you are ‘bitten’ by the vampire - you are not necessarily vampire by yourself. You are just being used by them, and by being strong you can always reject. But beware should you drink from theirs! This is very dangerous to your immortal spirit, and it will spoil your spirit like the rot spoils the decent wood.

(v) Vampiric Immortality

So, in legends vampires are immortal until staked into their heart by a wooden stake. Let’s first consider the immortality, then afterwards we’ll have few words of stakes.

To understand the legend of Vampiric Immortality, you need to understand immortality in general. Every spirit is immortal, only our matter decays. Once our body has decayed, it will die - but our spirits go on. By this I am not implying on theological views, but mere philosophical. Plato’s theory of forms is important to keep in mind when considering immortality. This immortality is not something that our personalities would last over death, that our bodies would last forever. We are created by the spirit, which is equivalent to the will. The will of human made the matter to take a shape of the human. It is the eternal form of human that will survive when we die.

We are like instances of computer program that compute their specific program and then returns zero either one to the program that overseers it. If it returns zero, nothing happens and the program is executed again, but if it returns one, it is complete and does not need to be recomputed. Imagine the form of human as the overseeing program, and the instance of that program is you. You live, and you either ascend or descend, depending of your life. Vampires returns zero forever, until they are ‘staked’.

So they are immortal in the sense that they will never be able to leave samsara, the wheel of life. The will be bound forever on the material word, doomed to circulate in it because their love of it. This is why they are called Cainites; they are called it because of their love towards the material, not exactly because Cain killed his brother Abel. Of course, Cain’s lust for profane was the motivator behind the murder too! Nevertheless, a vampire can be redeemed by ‘staking’, which is our next issue.

(vi) Killing the Vampire Within, Staking!

So if you find yourself to fit the description of vampire as explained above, don’t worry. You can always get ‘staked’ and have redemption - although that be meaning the end of your eternal life with mother matter. Not many Vampires are able to ‘stake’ themselves, because their lust in matter is such a great force, that they’ll rather do anything else. This is why the task is often left to the others, most likely to the close ones, that loves the vampire. So in general, staking is involuntary event for a vampire. In symbolism, wood is often conceived as spirit or wisdom just as sun (this is why vampires are said to suffer in sunlight) is. So staking is a metaphorical equivalent of forceful conversion. A vampire infested heart is hence forcefully brought into the light, so to speak. If this ‘stake’ hits the heart - meaning that the evil soul takes note of the wise words spoken to him - he will automatically convert and be saved of his past deeds. From thereon, he will be able to lead a good life and eventually start the ascension towards the spirit.

In spite of conclusions...

In this short treatise I have dealt with the properties of mythological vampires, and have made an attempt to translate these ‘allegorical’ properties to more common, and more easily understandable form.

I have always believed that there are most likely a truth basis for every myth that has sufficient age and redundancy. So in the light of preceding paragraphs, I’ve come into the conclusion that in this sense I’ve explained, vampires are real. Of course they are not literally bloodsucking creatures that gets burned in the daylight, but rather a metaphorical condition of human soul. Anyone that feels need of controlling other people’s lives, has potentially a ‘vampiric’ soul. So often the members of governments, the kings and other despots are really the worst kind of kin - but their small minions do live at many homes, sitting on that couch and yelling to one’s partner that ‘get me more bear or I’ll beat ya!’. Of course there are many more subtle ways of domination than mere violence. There are types of psychic control which relates to psychology, and this type of domination is even worse because the rot is then deeper within the soul and more difficult to cleanse.

Sincerely,

-v

I don't know what to say, but I want a reply with something as well thought out as what you have written.

The first thing is, this brings the topic of vampyres to a whole new level of discussion. Instead of the terrestrial creature, you've given it a spiritual connotation. By this I mean the view that most have of a vampyre is as you have mentioned, a blood-sucking creature. But in truth, its not a (un)living thing, its a way of acting towards others, a turn from the dark and into the light (Luke, I am your father). The great hubris' of mankind, which to one extend or another we all share.

On an academic front, I can appreciate the metaphorical comparisons, but as a lover of the paranormal...its kills the vision of a glamorous vampyre for me.

I don't know enough about vampyre lore to suggest that the ancients were speaking metaphorically when they discussed this over their fires. But, to be conceded a little, I would think they were a little more simple back then. Granted there were great thinkers, Plato as you mentioned. However, I would think that the common folk relied on superstition and common reference. To them, if a story of a monster was told, the most worst that could be imagined probably was. This was then self-perpetuated to an extent that we have the traits we all know now (again as you mentioned about the broken telephone game). Still, at the core there is truth, but is it how you perceive it or how the classic image as it has been perpetuated? I cannot say.

But for me, I'm sticking with the blood hungry fiend, makes for a better Hallowe'en costume than a banker!


Cheers

O.

reply to post by Okwari

Originally posted by Okwari
On an academic front, I can appreciate the metaphorical comparisons, but as a lover of the paranormal...its kills the vision of a glamorous vampyre for me.

Yeah I know And I cannot - and don't want - to convert anyone seeing this as I do. Yet I can assure that the disappointment is a short lived one; metphysical vampires gives really more real version of the blood sucker, you can actually view that they exists! Anyway, Vampires are also kind of archetypes in dreams; representing themselves. If one dreams about being a vampire, there's a chance that he is. Scary, I have had those dreams but not in times tho. I am not sure about exact description of archetypical vampyre, but I am quite certain that it represents our collective fears in some way.

Originally posted by Okwari
But for me, I'm sticking with the blood hungry fiend, makes for a better Hallowe'en costume than a banker!

hell no. I see you already got the idea.

-v

It frustrates me to read people insisting that vampires exist here on earth as they do in, say, Anne Rice's Earth.

These people typically do not realize how new that stereotype is: their 400-year-old vampire that they know is living down the street became a vampire long before Brahm Stoker invented the image for us.

Not to mention how biologically impossible the physiology is.

There's no way the Hollywood schtick is real, simply on a practical level, but yet people insist that it is. Certainly elements of the legend have a realistic base, and I think psychic vampirism is a very real phenomena, (though I don't know if there is an actual exchange of energy in all cases) but no--there are no actual vampires in the "Dracula" sense.





Although a lot of lonely teenagers would say otherwise.

Originally posted by asmeone2
It frustrates me to read people insisting that vampires exist here on earth as they do in, say, Anne Rice's Earth.

These people typically do not realize how new that stereotype is: their 400-year-old vampire that they know is living down the street became a vampire long before Brahm Stoker invented the image for us.

Not to mention how biologically impossible the physiology is.

There's no way the Hollywood schtick is real, simply on a practical level, but yet people insist that it is. Certainly elements of the legend have a realistic base, and I think psychic vampirism is a very real phenomena, (though I don't know if there is an actual exchange of energy in all cases) but no--there are no actual vampires in the "Dracula" sense.

Although a lot of lonely teenagers would say otherwise.

Agreed. As a character, I can appreciate the Anne Rice or the Bram Stoker vision. It is romanticized; it’s the ideal of what an antagonist should be. In an academic perspective, you have to look at the core truth. Why have these people (slavics mainly), described these entities as such. What drove them to create or explain them as these creatures? I am sure that in the 1600s or when ever, they were not seen as how we perceive them today. They were the scourges of the earth; they were the dread in which they lived. So what does that say? What does that say about anything that has perpetuated within modern society? UFOs were fairies, were dragons were the Sun God. As our knowledge grows so does our fears and how they are manifested.

I simply stated that the romanticized version of the vampyre appealed to my idea of what they are, Hollywood aside. V0liO's vision is that of those that would control you and corrupt you into sin. Who is to say either is incorrect, its about conceptions and understanding of your reality of wrong and right.

If they are real, who can say? Like everything else discussed on this forum, it is conjecture. You will never have a concrete answer that will satisfy everyone. You will only have opinion and what is wrong with that? I'm sure here are BS artists out there for their own ends, but I'm truthful in what I say, I try to present my ideas and beliefs as I see them.

Anyway...I will end it there. But one is not any better than the other. It is just different and difference is what makes the world turn.

O.

What ~eloquent~ word choice you have, OP.
But you really aren't describing anything more than people.
People manipulate. Humankind is the most evil group of monsters ever made. That's the way i see it.
Did no one ever think of why vampires are always dark creatures?
Most if not all mythological beings that existed in the dark were always labeled evil. Why?
Darkness is viewed as negative.
Why? Because it is also viewed as the unknown.
Why? Because people can't see in the dark.
There are certain observable features in nature... that much is true. There are the people who burn badly in the sun, and have allergies otherwise. That doesn't mean they're evil- or vampires.
Vampire bats survive solely off blood, but who ever called them soulless creatures?
Bram Stoker wrote this "stake the heart and save the soul" stuff.
I don't like the metaphor, honestly.
The fact is, we can't at the moment define the word "vampire", but it could do well without the automatic negativity. Because the negativity isn't automatic.
I'm sure there are some shaking their heads- at least one- at my saying so matter-of-factly that humans are the most evil, and in a vampire thread. There are individuals out there, somewhere, with some good in their hearts, unpolluted. There must be. If I can't be right saying all humans are evil, then the "dark is automatically bad" business can't be right either.

Originally posted by Levita
But you really aren't describing anything more than people.

Yeah you are correct. I am aware that those supporting the classical interpretation of vampire, consider them to be kind of a differend breed. I admitted in the conclusions part of treatise, that:

Originally posted by v01i0
Of course they are not literally bloodsucking creatures that gets burned in the daylight, but rather a metaphorical condition of human soul.

But I again, I do not deny that actual species of vampires exists. I am merely suggesting that the myth beyond vampires might be such as stated above. It is kind of a bridge I try to constuct between those that want to deny existence of vampires althogether, and those that insist in believing them without any or suspicious evidence. I try to be empirist to the bone, so I have no choice but conclude above unless a real vampire would step in front of me and demonstate 'it's' capabilites.

Otherwise I have no clue whatsover

Sincerely,

-v