XyphokonicOrder.org

What is Xyphoism?
Xyphokron
Ordinance
Xyphokron Summary
Xyphozon Overviews
Commentary ARchives
Freqently asked Questions
About Us

  • Question: What’s the Difference between Archangels, Sacred Servants, and the Hayles?

    Greetings from the Xyphokonic Order and Ordinance. Today, we shall continue our series on general inquiry and curious questions regarding the Philosophy. Today, had a question proposed to help clarify the overall hierarchy of angelic status within the Order—namely the differences between the titular ranks. So today, I’ll shall focus in on these. Let’s begin.

    To burn away confusion from this, it should be principle to state that all beings who are infused with Sacred Spirituality from the Lords are angelic by default. In our Spectrum, there are certainly great and powerful beings—namely the Shiupsyodon—who possess fantastic and awesome powers; this doesn’t make them angelic however. In order to be bestowed such a status, a being must be infused with the Sacred Spirituality of the Lords.

    The key word in this is “infused.” The Sacred Children, by default, simply have Sacred Spirituality as direct Incarnates of the Lords, so while they certainly possess all the divine powers of the Lords, they are technically a step above even those of angelic status. In their time growing up in Xyzokizon prior to being birthed as Mortals in Xyphojinami, the Sacred Children were, even not fully masterful in their own powers, the second-most powerful beings in all of existence from being the Incarnates of the Lords alone; this would mean that even during their time mentoring under the Hayles, the Sacred Children possessed greater spiritual power than the Hayles themselves but simply lacked the skill and knowledge to properly harness it. Regardless, the Children are above those of angelic status and aren’t the focus of this Sacred Infusion.

    For those that do fall under this, we come to the Hayles and Sacred Servants. Before discussing both, it is crucial to reiterate that both the Hayles and Sacred Servants fall into a spiritual category known as an Archangel—that most powerful of Angels under the Lords and who have been granted the retention of Self along with Sacred Spirituality. Archangels are given this status to serve great roles in the Order and often as reward for past roles before becoming angels; this has demonstrably been given to powerful Shiupsyodon who hold great loyalty to the Lords and played crucial roles in serving the Divine Thrones during Deceptuary’s rebellion.

    Moving into the details, the difference between the Hayles and the Sacred Servants is often seen as one of semantics. Technically, all angels are servants of the Lords, but what capacity they serve makes the determining difference. The Hayles, previously the Divine Generals to the Lords, were recrafted into becoming the High Communicators for each Xyphozon while also being the mentors and caretakers of the Sacred Children prior to mortal Birth. This role was very specific in its criteria and given specifically to these nine beings. The term “Hayle” was crafted specifically for these beings, yet they are still Archangels but ones with a specific duty.

    Sacred Servants are just as the name suggests, high servants to the Lords and Order and in general—with, what it seems, no specific Xyphozon in which they serve solely. The two most prominent examples are Daetos, Scribe of Idol, and his younger brother Zeiga, Overseer of the Cosmos. Both are Archangels rewarded with Sacred Spirituality for their various roles prior to the formation of the Order. However, neither appear to serve under a single Xyphozon specifically as their titular roles are overarching and multifaceted. Daetos, for example, is the Sacred Archivist and records and recounts all records of existence; he is the author of Xykozheiz, the section of writing that recounts the existence of our entire world and the basis for the Xyphokron. Meanwhile, Zeiga is charged with overseeing the Cosmos themselves and aptly in charge of the flow of spiritual flow through the Gate of Zeiga—all this while also handling his own Contracts of Zeiga to show great devotion to the Lords.

    These two Archangels have duties that span across all of the Spectrum, with characteristics that could be attributed to multiple Xyphozons, yet are not stated as to which Xyphozon their original Spirits came from. This appears to be somewhat intentional, as the devotion to the Lords supersedes the need for Self-identification, and so Sacred Servants devote their focus to their given duties rather than what Xyphozon they originate from as Spirits as the Self no longer matters upon ascending to Sacred Status.

    So, to conclude, the differences between Archangels, Hayles, and Sacred Servants appears to be entirely of semantics. The Hayles and Sacred Servants are both Archangels; The Hayles are specifically the High Communicators for each Xyphozon and mentors to the Sacred Children; Sacred Servants work on behalf of the Order in a more general sense and may have duties that span across the entire Spectrum. Neither appear to necessarily outrank the other, but it is assumed that the closest ally to each Lord respectably would be their selected Hayle while Sacred Servants are devoted to the Lords and the Order in a general sense.

    —phX

  • Question: Are the Arch-Hayle Grandurates considered Prophets?

    Greetings from the Xyphokonic Order and Ordinance. On this surprisingly busy of Sacred Days, and under the Period of Mauris, we continue our series of asking intriguing questions and answering them from the Xyphoist Perspective. Today’s question is about your authors, ourselves. The questions proposes the following: “Are we, the Arch-Hayle Grandurates of this very Ordinance, considered prophets or founders of this Xyphoist religious movement?” Why don’t we explore this question together?

    There is some dissonance between what the general definition of a prophet is and how Xyphoites would see the definition, but the general answer to this question is no—we don’t consider ourselves neither prophets or the founders of the Xyphoist religion. The general definition of prophet does suggest a person or persons have received and are spreading the word of the divine to others, which we are technically doing here on this very site. However, we discredit the idea that we ourselves are prophets on a few key metrics.

    To start, the information we share here is, through our own timeline, universal; all this Realmly Knowledge is locked within each and every person simply awaiting their own awakening to decipher it, and so it’s more appropriate to say we have purposely sought after this information that all have access to and formed the Ordinance with it. And while it is true that the Prophecy—aptly named—bestowed to the ancient Xyphoites before they committed ritual martyrdom was designed to be carried in the cores of their future reincarnations, the Prophecy never explicitly said it would be us nine Arch-Hayle Grandurates specifically, only that the remaining Xyphoites would be encoded with this Prophecy and would be reborn in a time most needed for it. This suggests there’s more than nine individuals encoded with this Prophecy, and that we just so happen to find each other in a timely fashion and formed this Ordinance along with the editorial and tech staff alongside us.

    To go on, the idea of attaching ourselves to the title of prophet and especially as “founders” is both narcissistic and also inaccurate. To start, we cannot “found” and existing Realmly Order; the Xyphokonic Order, Its Philosophy, and all that comes from it, already exist. We’re simply helping put this Ordinance together to serve the already-existing Order. Adding to that,  attaching our names personally to this movement falls under the Immoral Act of Worldly Self-Obsession—or at least we have privately agreed to such. This is why we go by our codes names here on this very site. For example, I am known as “phoX” and go by this name instead of any given legal name specifically because I am an agent of the Order, I am one with the Xyphozons, and I’m the Pharusian Arch-Hayle Grandurate. I don’t need nor want my actual name to be credited for that is a selfish want—a seeking of self-gratified glory. I am simply phoX. We Arch-Hayle Grandurates don’t seek recognition, only the goals of the Order: Mitigating worldly suffering, defeating Deceptuary’s evil, and Maintaining the Equilibrium.

    —phX

  • Question: Can you Paint Images of the Lords?

    Greetings from the Xyphokonic Order and Ordinance. We have entered Mauris, Second Period of Lord Pharuuii. And since we already did a Xyphozon overview in Augrussé, we have different plans for this Period. The Pharusian Xyphozon is all about seeking Realmly Knowledge, as we all should do in our times as Mortals. As mentioned before in previous Commentary, the reason for Lord Pharuuii, Lord Carnyie, and Lord Vuetenexzyei having two Periods of Watching in Xyphojinami is because those three Xyphozons have the most pertinent presence in the lives of Mortals. During Life, Mortals are eternally subjected to the Reality of Death. Mortals use the power of Worship to seek Realmly Truths during Life, and once sought, can use these Truths to mitigate worldly suffering, defeating Deceptuary’s evil, and Maintaining the Equilibrium. Hence, asking questions is tantamount to this entire process. So for this Period, we shall be spending it asking questions of general interest and providing the Xyphoist answer or perspective to them.

    Today, we start with the topic of art in Xyphoism. Namely, the question being propositioned is: “Can you paint the Lords or other figures in the Xyphokonic Order?” If you’re a follower of the Order yourself or have simply been reading these Commentary out of curiosity, the Xyphoist answer should be quite obvious by now. Of course you can paint the Lords! The recount of their presence from Daetos in Xykozheiz explicitly gives their general appearance as seen from Daetos’s vision. And while it is certainly likely the true form of the Lords is far beyond comprehension, it’s highly likely the vision of the Lords was presented to all of existence in a form we can understand. This is why, in most cases, the Lords are personified in humanoid forms, described using humanistic characteristics, and are referred to using human-orientated terms.

    This, of course, does not mean the true form of the Lords is humanoid, but we are simply not of the level to truly comprehend that level of spiritual elevation, and that is perfectly okay. Regardless, the desire to give artistic presentation to the Lords, the Archangels, or the Sacred Children is entirely reasonable to seek and to do. In some divergent philosophies, there can be a taboo or stigma to give any sort of artistic rendition of key figures; this is not the case in Xyphoism. In fact, in our private discussion among us Arch-Hayles Grandurates, we have personally discussed and have shared our own artistic takes on the Lords based off of Daetos’s description—with some variation in how we envisioned the Lords exact appearance but with more alike than not.

    We, however, have decided not to release these artistic takes, or at least not here on the Order’s webpage, for we feel it would be more intriguing to let others create their own original renditions of these figures instead. At some point, we’d like to post our own Xyphoist art on perhaps a forum or other sites, but we will reserve this site for philosophical discussion and teaching philosophy.

    Moving back on topic, by the Nature of Devotional and Passionate Love, art and music play a big part in Xyphoist culture. As already demonstrated in other Commentary, songs are often written about key concepts and figures in the Order, with the exception of the Lords themselves in most cases—although that is a case of the Lords simply not demanding the praise and so there is no taboo to doing so if one wishes to.

    Generally speaking, there is a free expression to how anyone wishes to portray the appearance of the Lords based off of Daetos’s recount, although certain characteristics are hard to avoid when presenting their appearances. For example, Lord Vuetenexzyei is explicitly said to be appear as a golden skeleton shrouded in a long, miasmic-like black cloak; it would be hard to represent Him as something entirely different than that expression, but certainly not implausible or taboo to do so.

    In our own private comparisons, it’s almost always understood among us AHGs that Lord Carnyie’s eyes are always closed and hands in praying formation to represent His near-constant state of repose in which He spends His time in serenity listening to the Prayers of Woe, but there’s nothing stating this as law nor does that mean one couldn’t present Him with open eyes. In our personal notes, there are a lot of comparisons we’ve all aligned with of the appearance of the Lords, but all of it is our visions and are subject to an open interpretation.

    This also extends down to the Hayles and Sacred Servants, the Children, or even the visions of the Sacred Realms themselves—which we also have discussed privately about while drafting future Commentary about the Realms. Furthermore, musical expression is yet another open interpretation of Xyphoist expression, in which people can compose or craft how they feel about key concepts or figures through music, vocalization and chants, and other sounds.

    Essentially, the point is that there is no taboo on artistic expression in the Xyphoist Philosophy, and that also includes negative interpretations. It is all but certain that petulant beings will mock and attack the image of the Order and of the Philosophy itself, and that’s perfectly okay. As said many times before, the Lords are not petty, they are busy and above the need to be concerned about such acts. As we are gifted this Life and Free Will from Lord Kyaien as a parting gift to Xyphojinami, we are able to express ourselves and our perspectives through art, and are also able to paint an image of divinity to better connect ourselves with these high beings we devote ourselves too. Art is important, and it’s more important to let it be free.

    —phX