lions are the kings of animals. the reason yaldabaoth and other archons/gods/demons being represented as animistic beings is because the "energy" that keeps our "reality", known to the aristotelian lycaeum and platonic school as anima mundi/sophia and and by the vedics as maya/shakti, is feminine and related to the nature/material world. she was consumed by the primordial masculine, that demiurge/nous represents, in primordial times before the emergence of animals on earth, and as a result there is an excessive representation of those beings under the weight of archetypes that govern the whole. > from the root ul () or il (), which may originally have been written as eyl () = "to be mighty"; the concept of el thus gives a "mighty one" or "hero", and suggests something similar to the greek heroes who preceded the olympian deities (e.g. zeus in his sacred-king capacity). "mighty one" also means "hero" in the greek sense, and is used specifically in this way for shimshon (samson) and nimrod; however the yehudit generally uses gibor () in such human contexts > in order to understand the semitic/arabic/phoenician concept of el as god/s we need to see them, rather than "him", as the natural animistic forces of the universe being perceived as kinetic impulses, very much in the primitive/greek manner. el was not a single divinity but a compound term for the atavistic belief that within every living being there is a spirit or force of life that is extinguishable; the "lan vital", in bergson's terminology, the ba, in the ancient egyptian > an el was believed to inhabit virtually every living organism, but nothing more so than the oak tree, whose longevity (some oaks can live up to five hundred years) and whose remarkable capacity to draw lightning, make it an obvious tree to associate with the deity. hence the yehudit word for oak tree is elon (), which quite literally means "the place where the god lives"
Brazil