In spiritual and magico-religious circles, it is not unprecedented at all to see salvatory and transcendental strains of thought. What likely should be more surprising, though, are ones that are attenuated.
This is quite common in religion (see, afterlives). Even in occultism, however, you still see this in many places.
Union with a Higher Self whose power is undefined. Joining the ranks of gods (lowercase), or already being among them. Becoming angelic. Simply becoming more in accord with spirits or other revered divinities. Removal of desire and or personality and subsequent relief from pain. Or even just no model for personal attainment at all.
What is likely more understandable about these attitudes is that someone simply hasn't put much thought into it. This is more observable among the non-religious population, and in many cases these people still retain some unconscious purity of hope, simply one not elaborated upon in much detail. But such rather subdued goals can still be found among large swathes of the occult population. Some of this can of course be attributed to differences of culture or personality, particularly in regards to traditions wherein magic is less of a mode of salvation as is common in the contemporary West. And of course there are many traditions which entail ultimate transcendence of some form or another, with the Self as God and other such conceptions of final glory (ex. Thelema, Jainism, etc.). But it is nonetheless surpising how much any sort of finitude can be tolerated in the secular community, nevermind the occult one.
It is perhaps more illuminating to illustrate such attitudes with another example; that of lowly spiritual states. One of the most prominent examples of this would of course be the conception of afterlives of suffering as is known in many religions, but there are many other places where one can find this. Lowly spirits such as certain elementals (this one being even more pertinent given the spiritual mortality of them in many strains of Hermeticism). The general "usage" of spirits, with little concern for their own enlightenment. Even demon kings' agency is rendered irrelevant when they are bound to the will of a magician, as they are divinely obliged to do in many magical systems. Yet even "spiritolatrous" attitudes are quite deficient in this regard as well. In propitiating spirits, or acknowledging oneself as a lowly part of a magical ecosystem, one implicitly insults those whom they revere, as they inherently envisage a universe of finitude and limitation, regardless of it being supernatural or not. Thus, even the greatest spirit is rendered imperfect in a fundamental way (i.e., by saying that total perfection does not exist). A common objection to such attitudes is that framing things in such a manner somehow misses the point, or that there is a greater illumination beyond just wanting the best spiritual end-result possible (usually with the implication that traditional conceptions of relief from suffering or goodness are solely limited, "Western" frameworks). Of course, a counter-example to this is that it goes against reason, the only objection to which can be gnosis or direct experience of the truth. Of course, such an attitude that would support one's argument can also come against it, as one can have gnosis in support of the exact opposite conviction (in a traditional paradox, if one wishes to respect the mystical experience of another, they cannot actually acquiesce to it in any capacity, and have to stick to their own gnosis or else undermine the foundations of both positions).
Another common objection to models which stress ultimate transcendence (usually in regards to the personal mode, but sometimes also to the impersonal or universal one) is that it promotes egotism as opposed to humility. This is of course fallacious in that correct views can technically support poor attitudes, yet they remain the truth. Further, however, this sort of reason fundamentally clampens many models of the magical will or of independence, arbitrarily limiting it as opposed to necessarily limiting it (as can be necessary in terms of theory of omnipotent beings interacting with one another, though most magical circles don't get too invested in "theological masturbation" as it were).
In regards to universalism, an often unconsidered point is that it is simply necessary for any true divinity to be in the ultimate sense. Else, there is no omnipresence (or omnisubstantiality). In the human mind, we often deal in terms of guilt, or effort, and while such things are necessary in terms of free will, this sort of factor pales in comparison to what is really necessary. In worrying about justifying complacency and feeling the need to add in an arbitrary "game fail state," one ends up erecting an idol and sacrificing the true God.
Much of what I have said can also be applied to more worldly things.
In conclusion, there are many schools of thought that will accept less-than-perfect universes, gods, and personal transcendences. Such goes against the nature of Magic.
As can be ascertained, this is quite a rough post, more intended to get topics that have been on the mind onto text. I believe I will address more points related to it in future posts regarding spiritual imposter syndrome and the relation of literal supernatural phenomena to religion and magic.