THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.magick.goetia,alt.christnet.demonology,alt.satanism
From: nagasiva@luckymojo.com (nagasiva yronwode)
Subject: Re: Evocation to Imaginable Manifestation? (was The Book of Solomon's Magick)
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:45:24 GMT

50000925 Vom
lots of 5s today

Gnome d'Plume:
>>>>> because the actual process is subjective and cannot be photographed. 

nagasiva:
>>...obviously it is not visible to the naked eye because
>>it doesn't appear on film without special effects. elsewise the truly
>>critical Absolute Manifestation Magician would say that they weren't
>>successful in their evocation and only imagined it or only achieved
>>a manifestation on the Astral Plane (cf. Dion Fortune's discernment
>>between the two: astral/physical, who was ectoplasmic in her ideas).

Gnome d'Plume:
> There are other valid methods of conjuration in Goetia presently in use. 

you know, I wouldn't have been so peculiarly interested if I hadn't
received many inquiries from Goetic Magicians (at least this is how they
characterized themselves) who touted the doctrine that 'if it isn't 
evoked to visibility then it isn't the real mccoy'. I thought that 
they were kind of ghost-buster-like in their attitudes and, when they
would talk with me about these demons wrestling them to the ground
and tearing their clothes I found it rather extreme. these were in
some cases well-placed individuals in occult orders. so I have ever
since tried to understand what was being claimed by demon-summoners.

what constitutes a "valid method of conjuration"? I personally think
that the physical/visible manifestation stuff is tenuous at best and
possibly entirely charlatanry. I was reading Fortune on it recently 
(discernable through my mention of her above) and she (as did Levi) 
mentioned the Medium as an essential role in evocative summonings:

	In the great majority of cases of evocative magic, the form
	is built up in on the astral and can only actually be seen by the
	clairvoyant, though any sensitive person can feel its influence.
	It is only when there is a materializing medium as member of
	the circle that materialization takes place and the form
	evoked is visible to the physical eye. A tenuous type of form
	can be induced to build itself up by the use of certain substances
	that give off ectoplasm, the principal of which is fresh blood;
	excreta can also be used for the same purpose. A considerable
	bulk of these unpleasantsubstances is necessary, however, to
	get a form of any definiteness, and their virtue is fugitive, for
	the ectoplasm has gone off by the time the body heat has
	departed. Therefore for all practical purposes they are of no use
	to the operator under the ordinary conditions of civilized life;
	neither can a very high type of presence be induced to manifest
	through such media....
	-----------------------------------------------------------------
	"Applied Magic", Dion Fortune, Aquarian Press, 1987; p. 105.
	____________________________________________________________

do you agree that these roles (magnetizer/medium) are traditional, 
necessary to evocation to perceivable appearance by the mage, and
if so, what is the value of attempting to do more than "just evoke"
a spirit? how does 'mere evocation' differ from mediumized evocation
if it isn't based on the fact that these spirits produce some kind
of ectoplasmic, physically-observable (by cameras) result?

just to be sure you know where I'm coming from here, I have quite a
bit of experience in ritual and out with gods, spirits, elementals,
and what I'd call demons. sometimes I could perceive them, but did
know that nobody else around would be able to if I'd drawn their
attention to these beings. I've refused to decide whether this
meant that the phenomenon was completely subjective or represented
some contact with a being at least partially outside my consciousness.
in many cases I received information that I was certain I did not
consciously originate, and this was impressive to me and gave me
reason to continue to pursue communications, contact, service, and 
in a few cases, worship. so I am not asking these questions in order
to make you look bad or embarrass you or anything. I'm serious.

> Lon Du Quette uses a non-visual "presence" and "communication"
> approach (although he has gotten occasional visuals as a side-effect).
> However, the old Goetia method specifies "conjuration to visible
> appearance" and demands that the spirit "appear in fair and human
> form." As far as I know our method (dark  mirror facial
> reflection/distortion) is the only practical and replicatable method
> of doing this short of spending years in a Bardon type training
> program, 

what are you proposing that spending years in such a program would help
you to achieve? what better results do you think are possible?

> or driving yourself (and your assistants) to exhaustion and
> temporary insanity ala Steve Savedow, 

do elaborate here, if you will, concerning what you know about
Mr. Savedow and his temporary insanity. it is obvious that he is
not the most popular of demonologists, by accounts from Darth Pikachu,
my own review of his text, and others, so I'm curious what you have
available about his practice that you would make such a comment. thanks.

> or taking a whopping does of
>something to alter your consciousness ala Crowley and others --

this I've done and can testify to its effectiveness, though the
psychoactives may get in the way of grounding the experience or
retaining one's bearings (a certain amount of discipline is
required to make it a truly valuable mechanism for summoning).
I notice that those who use this method predominantly are more
prone to flights of imaginative fancy and gullibility.

>or being a natural clairvoyant (which most of us are not).

many Hermetic authors mention the value of having clairvoyants
involved with summonings. how would such an individual become
part of your ritual evocation? my understanding is that a
clairvoyant is someone who can see at a distance, as through
someone else's eyes, or at a different location, through what
are typically referred to as psychic abilities. why would a
clairvoyant (rather than a medium) be valuable?

>       Our method derives from the Eastern practice of evoking
> previous incarnations,  

I've never heard of that. something you learned from Buddhists?
how is this conceptualized in terms of cosmology that one's
previous incarnations could be evoked?

> the African practice of evoking visions of one's ancestors, 

visions seem to be popular in religious cosmologies, so that is
not too surprising.

> and the Arabian idea (according to Ibn Al Kaldhun) that "a mist 
> forms between the scryer and the mirror upon which the vision appears."

who was Ibn Al Kaldhun?  I'd like to compare and contrast the variety 
of techniques used by all of these individuals, inclusive of your
own, and anyone else who wishes to contribute to this thread. this is
in part why I'm taking such time in reviewing your publications below.

for my part, I've never used a glass, mirror, or stone in an
attempt to evoke, and only really put my will into a single
summoning of this sort (with no immediate 'visible' appearance). 
since then my technique has without exception been INvocation, 
even with demons, and I'm curious how evoking is being 
accomplished, complete with its variation of methods.

>        We consider Goetia to be an ancient system of ritual
> self-perfection, purification and universal-mind access in line with
> the principals of Hermetic philosophy and Carl Jung's concept of an
> archetypal dimension called the "Collective Unconscious."

a psychological model of magic. yes, this is the rationalization of
demons that I first accepted as legitimate (first magical essay).
there is much to recommend it. it does seem to fit into Hermetic
values and goals nicely when interpreted in this manner. all those
who did not understand this possibility with whom I've spoken have
told me that Goetic evocation was 'insane and dangerous' and that
I should avoid it. I found their warning somewhat extreme.

>        We have been doing this work on a monthly basis since 1969. 

admirable.

>        We have covered this in much more detail in a free download of
>the chapter *Secrets of the Dark Mirror* from *The Book of Solomon's
>Magick* on our web site at:
>http://members.aol.com/CHSOTA/productions.html where you can also
>download our *Gnostica* article *Magick & Hypnosis.*

thanks! I was able to download both to my UNIX shell and get them
into MSWord documents and I'll review them in subsequent posts.

nagasiva
-- 
FREE HOODOO CATALOGUE! send street address to: catalogue@luckymojo.com
mailto:nagasiva@luckymojo.com ; http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html ; mailto:boboroshi@satanservice.org ; http://www.satanservice.org/ 
emailed replies may be posted; cc replies if response desired

Path: typhoon.sonic.net!not-for-mail
From: boboroshi@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE)
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.magick.goetia,alt.christnet.demonology,alt.satanism
Subject: Re: Evocation to Imaginable Manifestation? (was The Book of Solomon's Magick)
Organization: Sonoma Interconnect,Santa Rosa,CA(us),http://www.sonic.net
Lines: 410
Sender: yronwode@sonic.net
Message-ID: <8qo037$4h@bolt.sonic.net>
References: <8qg92q$hsh@bolt.sonic.net> <20000922201453.07845.00000452@ng-da1.aol.com> <8qhbj4$9cu@bolt.sonic.net> <39cde470.5236401@news.earthlink.net>
Reply-To: boboroshi@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE)
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.4 (NOV)
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:48:55 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.201.224.36
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 969900535 208.201.224.36 (Mon, 25 Sep 2000 09:48:55 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 09:48:55 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:25337 alt.magick:211237 alt.magick.goetia:479 alt.christnet.demonology:11763 alt.satanism:157128

50000925 Vom

Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume):
> We have covered this in much more detail in a free download of
>the chapter *Secrets of the Dark Mirror* from *The Book of Solomon's
>Magick* on our web site at:
>http://members.aol.com/CHSOTA/productions.html where you can also
>download our *Gnostica* article *Magick & Hypnosis.*

ok, here's the review of "Magick & Hypnosis":
----------------------------------------------

in this article (1999 apparently) you write:
#	hypnosis is the operative technique of Ceremonial Magick. 
#	Visions of Spirits appearing in the Triangle of Art are 
#	actually archetypes evoked from the deep-mind via hypnotic 
#	induction.

if this is true, then why does it matter whether one evokes to a
visual appearance (to the mage)? as long as one is perceptive
enough and in tune with one's own faculties of imagination, why
would evocation to any kind of communication (even merely sonic) 
be enough?

several times you mention Jungian archetypes in the collective 
unconscious. you believe that these are as Jung described them?
what evidence do you have which leads you to believe that these 
are real, or as you put it "a reality that goes beyond anyone's 
individual conception" and "contains the entire history of the 
human race and probably the destiny of mankind"?

#	As Dion Fortune put it: "Magick is the art of causing changes 
#	in consciousness to occur in accordance with the will" 

does this mean that you believe that ALL magic is effectively merely
psychological, as compared to enabling the magician to affect the
world outside hir mind? or do you have some explanation for why what
Hermetics call "Low Magic" works?

#	The reason why so few people practice magick is not that 
#	there are so few students of the art -- there are 
#	thousands -- but that only a few know the real secret. (1.)

the notes (as "(1.)") do not appear to be contained within this
file, fyi.

#  	Victorian forbears of The Golden Dawn were not able to 
#	reconstruct the old method of magical evocation because 
#	they refused to accept its hypnotic basis. 

upon what do you base this claim about the Golden Dawn members?
would they agree with you? why do you bother with their techniques
if they were ignorant of its basis in actual use? could it be that
their symbolism contains qualities which aren't immediately
obvious to those who use them and might become so within the 
context of trance state the way you're using it? what I'm trying
to get at here is why are you convinced that the GD symbolism is
truly worthwhile?
 
#	Crowley spent many weary hours trying to conjure a spirit 
#	to visible appearance in smoke over the Triangle of Art.

there's one technique: smoking the triangle and trying to see the
demons in the smoke during the rite.

#	...drugs. Such agents tend to activate their own unique 
#	effects....

we seem to agree on this, though my experience is that for some,
psychoactives can be a valuable tool for ritual (an ability to
retain some level of skepticism is imperative, as can be, during 
this period, a Magical Record to be reviewed when completely sober).

#	...magick and witchcraft are powerful psychodynamic systems, 
#	even in an exclusively subjective, phenomenologically 
#	conservative sense. The practice of "the art" and "the craft" 
#	is not as dangerous as our credulous Christian critics contend, 
#	but neither is it as frivolously dysfunctional as Cartesian 
#	pedants would suppose. We are the inheritors of a great ancient 
#	system of psychology perfected over thousands of years. It can 
#	bring much good and happiness to us and our associates or, like 
#	any of the major systems of knowledge, it can be misused with 
#	harmful effect. In magick and witchcraft, however, most 
#	malicious transitive operations tend to backfire because the 
#	would-be sorcerer does not understand the subjective nature of 
#	the art. (11.)

what danger is involved? are you talking about the detours of those
who discover their own symbol-system that you mention below? what is 
the range of repecussion which might be involved in a "backfire" of 
this type?

#	I strongly advise against initiating anyone who refuses to 
#	accept this concept [that magick is an hypnotic process]. 
#	In order to underline this point, I will admit to having made 
#	the mistake and finding out that there is no convincing such 
#	a person afterward to abandon his objective view. You will 
#	only succeed in convincing him that you are a poor magician 
#	because you are unable to make the floor burst open and spill 
#	forth the legions of Tartarus in cinemascope and stereophonic 
#	sound. 

LOL!  wonderfully written. I've witnessed similar interactions among
magicians, sometimes quite acid. do you think that some in the
Hermetic culture *know* the limitations of their magick and yet
initiate, train, or otherwise work with those with objective views
such as these in the hopes that they'll 'come around'? it can set
the candidate up for a tremendious let-down to be sure.

#	In ceremonial magick everyone should have their turn at taking 
#	every role in temple rites, seasonal ceremonies, and 
#	initiations; otherwise a magical lodge becomes a "cult" in the 
#	worst sense of the word.

agreed. this seems to be how the cult of Crowleyanity is developing.

#	We recommend Leslie M. LeCron's "Self-Hypnotism: The Technique 
#	and Its Use in Daily Living" as a basic text. 

thanks, a valuable reference. 

#	[The trance states of "yoga students and Zen sitters" are 
#	closely associated with sedentary asana positions, and 
#	induction of the trance is less controlled and direct. It 
#	is, in fact, a by-product of the meditation rather than 
#	the principle effect.

my limited experience confirms this. yogic austerities and zazen
seem to be the foundation of insight into the reality of oneself
in a kind of composed entirety, rather than viewing aspects of
oneself in imaginative forms. compare the visualizations of
Neopagans and Tibetan Buddhists for a closer resemblance.

#	...the ability to stare at a fixed point, or symbol, for 
#	long periods of time without blinking or letting the 
#	eyes change focus.... ...is absolutely essential to 
#	...Almadel and Goetia operations. 

how so?

#	It is important to note that such [Goetic] rituals [in which
#	the spirits may be interacted with] do not depend on the use 
#	of drugs or hysterical dancing preliminary to the experience.

was there anyone who has suggested hysterical dancing as a preliminary?
I've used this technique before for ritual once or twice, but didn't 
know that ceremonial magicians considered it seriously.

#	Before any magical working is undertaken , there should be a 
#	period of 'preliminary meditation'. 

similar to the 'grounding and centering' of Wiccans, if this stands
alone. you subsequently describe a series of trance-inducing visuali-
zations, however, so I gather by 'meditation' you are here speaking
of a visualization as such. Wiccan or general Neopagan ritual
typically includes this as part of preliminaries for grounding or
group integrity, but also later in group journeying.

#	there are three basic types of magical operations: evocation, 
#	wherein the operator calls forth the spirit from his, or his 
#	receiver's, subconscious; invocation, wherein a supernal power 
#	is called down to in-dwell in the subconscious; and inner-plane 
#	projection (path working, soul-travel, etc.) wherein a 
#	journey is made into the realms of the subconscious -- in this 
#	case the collective unconscious. Healing, the building of 
#	telesmatic images, the charging of talismans, and even 
#	divination are variations on these basic themes.

what is the difference between 'building telesmatic images' and the
evocation of a spirit? to which of the above (evocation, invocation,
and projection) would you assign divination? why?

#	The traditional symbolism of these paths and spheres [involved
#	in path-working] is set forth in Gareth Knight's "A Practical 
#	Guide to Qabalistic Symbolism (1965)....

thanks for the reference. 

# 	The method is to create a consistent, realistic fantasy land 
#	which will include all the symbolism we wish to encounter

here is a direct connection with role-playing games -- one which I've
consistently tried to get magicians to take seriously.

#	The purpose of working a path is to learn more about it and 
#	yourself, that will bring something up from your subconscious 
#	that will help you along the road to individuation. The way 
#	we do this in the O.T.A.'s path-working system is to 
#	establish 'attention points'. (17.) These attention points 
#	are situations, objects, or entities that we are instructed 
#	to question individually and privately, or otherwise comprehend. 
#	We are told to remember the special knowledge we have received. 

this is a technique which is also valuable in dream-work. some find it
very easy to encounter repeated situations or places during a night's
dreaming which may allow one to establish a means of interacting with
that part of one's mind which fabricates it. there are those who claim
that Lovecraft was also familiar with it and that this is what led to
his construction of his 'Dreamlands'. roleplaying games and Thelemic
magicians (often Typhonians) have tried to use this possibility in
their ritual work to do the rough equivalent of demonic summoning.

#	Later, in the critique which always follows any magical 
#	operation, we are asked to recount what we have experienced. 
#	Some of these revelations are remarkable and often confirm 
#	our contention that the collective unconscious is truly a 
#	transpersonal dimension.

I'm not sure what this contention means, however. I'd agree, based
on my own ritual experience, that contact with the Between World
(as I've enjoyed calling it, after comic books) enables one to
encounter intelligences which are beyond the conscious mind. I am
not sure if this is what you mean by 'transpersonal', however. 
for example, I don't know if you'd use this contention to try to
explain how "Low Magic" spells work.

# 	Avoid the magus who has created his own revealed system 
#	for it will inevitably reflect the particular imbalances 
#	of his own personality. 

while I can appreciate this warning, and was previously going to
ask you how you could be sure that there is only one set of symbols 
useful for this ritual technique, I can understand that you are
saying that Hermetic tradition has rarefied a set of parameters for
ritual symbolism with which to work. I'd suggest in response that
those who find traditional symbolism to be problematic in some way
are not imprudent to look elsewhere for alternatives being used in
any number of more modern variations or in "creating their own
qabalah", as Crowley described it. while it may be more risky or
subject the mage to otherwise avoidable traps and complexes which
the traditional symbol system can sidestep, some aspects of this
same tradition can be abrasive and dangerous to the personalities
and/or background of the mage encountering it.

that is, I think that to suggest that traditional Hermetic
symbolism is 'safe for everyone' is irresponsible, and prone to
lead those not 'ready' for it into some of the same types of
problems about which you are warning here (because the Hermetic
tradition has its own imbalances of symbolism which those who 
engage it find palatable on account of background and taste).
this is especially possible if the bulk of Hermeticists (i.e.
the Golden Dawn) have been doing it without even understanding
its functional parameters (e.g. as a psychoanalytic tool).

some of these hazardous 'revealed' systems may prove to be more
in tune with those who have problems with Hermetic tradition,
though I don't expect that Hermetic mages would necessarily be
aware of this. it is the rough equivalent of the biases which
may be found in religious rituals (e.g. masses and their efficacy).

#	There is a more subtle danger which may be encountered 
#	even in traditional working. The operator himself is 
#	in a light state of trance (as he would be in any magical 
#	operation) and is subject to impromptu visionary 
#	experiences. He should not involve his group in such a 
#	phenomenon and should banish it, or extricate himself, 
#	as quickly and quietly as possible. If the scenario is 
#	properly written and rehearsed this should not be too 
#	much of a problem.

this is the place where individual vision-journeying becomes more
profitable to the mage, as I see it, than group working, because
the impromptu experiences have at times been very important to me.

in Neopagan ritual we've occasionally had folks 'wander off' on
their own visualization while the group was doing its thing. I
didn't notice that this proved severely detrimental to the rest
of the group, though I can see why it might be valuable to avoid
it, especially if everyone has a particular role with respect to
the ritual and you are depending on them to 'be there'.

#	Keep your narration simple and carefully sequenced so that 
#	you will not prematurely evoke a vision that you will 
#	contradict with a subsequent description.

this is very good advice (particularly with your elaboration)
for anyone interested in doing visualized ritual journeying.

#	...invocation. ...is usually done on the double-cube altar 
#	in the center of the great circle with a crystal orb as 
#	a focal point. In our Lemegeton system we derive invocational 
#	rituals from the book Almadel. 

maybe within certain traditions this is true, but generally it is
not done within such a constrained structure. that's a lovely
technical description with the orb, by the way. I presume that it
is described that way in the Almadel.

#	We can become so intellectual and sophisticated that we lose 
#	our sense of wonder, dimming the light of intuition that 
#	leads us on. I hope that I have at least hinted at the 
#	philosophical key to avoiding such a trap: the grand Hermetic 
#	monism of the Renaissance magi. 

this must be the 'key' of which you were speaking previously. I gather
by it you mean a particular interpretation of the grimoiric language
and ritual elements (in particular, along the lines of the psychological).

#	We should establish canons of magick in terms of kabbalistic 
#	philosophy, Jungian psychology and hypnotic practice -- for 
#	these are the three pillars upon which the art stands today. 

with regard to Hermetic magic, this seems a reasonable statement.
I do think you generalize overmuch, however, given that not all magic
is ceremonial and not all ceremonial is Hermetic/Solomonic.

#	End Notes: Magick and Hypnosis
#	...
#	My colleague, Philip H. Faber has written a fascinating  paper 
#	on the subject, Hypnosis and Ritual Magick for Paradigm 
#	Magazine. This can be accessed on Faber's website: 
#	http://members.aol.com/discord23/hypno.htm

definitely worth the read, though Faber's Crowleyphilia seems a bit
much at times.

#	A currently annotated version of Negative vs. Positive Gnosis 
#	will be posted on our web site at some future date. 

let us know if you ever get this up on the web site for viewing.

#	A former Jungian admirer, and avid promoter of Jungian ideas, 
#	Richard Noll, experienced a sudden change of heart (not 
#	uncommon among cult devotees) and wrote two books scathing 
#	the life and work of his mentor with yellow-journalistic 
#	fervor. Both these authors have capitalized on the 
#	unfortunate fact that Carl Jung, like Pope Pious, did not lie 
#	down across the tracks of an on-rushing Nazi train before and 
#	during World War II. ( For an extensive, and corrective, 
#	critique of these anti-Jungian works see Robin Robertson's 
#	review in Gnosis magazine, Winter 1998. 

hmm, this seems somewhat of an understatement given Jung's dealings
with the Solar-Phalic man episodes. I'm sure that some who read this
may find something to argue with you about here. in any case thanks
for the reference on the Jung-defense in Gnosis.

#	Eliphas Levi (whom Crowley claimed as a previous incarnation) 
#	attempted a similar experiment to summon the shade of Apolonius 
#	of Tyana. Quite properly he used a mirror as a conjuration 
#	device, but he mistakenly thought that smoke on the altar would 
#	provide a substance for the spirit to use in building a visible 
#	form. He was successful, at least in the visualization, but 
#	banished before attempting communication. 

I don't understand. if he was successful (and I wonder how anyone can
tell, over this intervening period of years, that he was, given his
lack of reliability about his reports), then why do you say that his
thought about the smoke was "mistaken"?

#	Today we use smoke before the dark mirror as an olfactory 
#	correspondence, and a mood enhancer. Concentration stays on 
#	the mirror, not the smoke....   ...the O.T.A.'s 'Assumption 
#	of God/Goddess Form' method of conjuration in which the 
#	receiver lies under a dark mirror while being lightly 
#	massaged by the operator and his assistants. 

so you differ with some traditional magicians on how the "visible
appearance" should be achieved. I appreciate the reflection on 
your technique. it sounds rather unusual. was the massage an
innovation of your own, extending from the concepts of Mesmer, 
as above, perhaps building on Reich, or did you get this from 
elsewhere?

#	...all this work, as valuable as it may be, merely refines 
#	our ability to employ a phenomenon we still don't understand. 

if true, then how can you be sure that you are 'correctly' 
proceeding and that Levi was 'mistaken'?

btw, you and Faber both mention the value of ideas and techniques
from Neuolinguistic Programming (NLP: Faber with respect to the 
Bandler/Grinder work; your off-handed reference to an NLP discipline),
which leads me to think that you focus on magic as predominantly a
linguistic and conceptually-keyed psychospiritual discipline. I'd
be interested in knowing why you bother with Levi and his ilk if
his ideas concerning magic are apparently so far off. is it possible
that those who describe magic differently can get some details right
and be so far off as regards the results or its general operation?

#	When we say 'traditional' we mean 'Golden Dawn' traditional. 
#	Although based on a Rabbinical structure, the 19th century 
#	G.D. system incorporates Tarot symbolism, and Pagan 
#	mythological archetypes. It has become standard for most 
#	students of Western magick.

upon what "rabbinical system" is it your understanding that the
Golden Dawn was based upon?

# 	The O.T.A. system was inspired by the soul-travel methods 
#	of Sikh-Sant guru Kerpol Singh (also the mentor of Paul 
#	Twitchell who developed Ekankar.) 

another important description. this helps us to see where your
ideas are getting coming from. my understanding is that Twitchell
and his Ekankarists do not think of their soul journeying as
strictly psychological in nature.

thanks for making your views available for free to the interested!
I hope that you may be able to address my questions. enjoy!

blessed beast!

boboroshi
Satanic Outreach Director,
Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
-- 
FREE HOODOO CATALOGUE! send street address to: catalogue@luckymojo.com
mailto:nagasiva@luckymojo.com ; http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html ; mailto:boboroshi@satanservice.org ; http://www.satanservice.org/ 
emailed replies may be posted; cc replies if response desired

Path: typhoon.sonic.net!not-for-mail
From: boboroshi@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE)
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.magick.goetia,alt.christnet.demonology,alt.satanism
Subject: Re: Evocation to Imaginable Manifestation? (was The Book of Solomon's Magick)
Organization: Sonoma Interconnect,Santa Rosa,CA(us),http://www.sonic.net
Lines: 68
Sender: yronwode@sonic.net
Message-ID: <8qpc12$64k@bolt.sonic.net>
References: <8qg92q$hsh@bolt.sonic.net> <20000922201453.07845.00000452@ng-da1.aol.com> <8qhbj4$9cu@bolt.sonic.net> <39cde470.5236401@news.earthlink.net> <8qo037$4h@bolt.sonic.net>  <8qp0je$oq@bolt.sonic.net> <39d02777.33554594@news.earthlink.net>
Reply-To: boboroshi@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE)
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.4 (NOV)
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 05:18:38 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.201.224.36
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 969945518 208.201.224.36 (Mon, 25 Sep 2000 22:18:38 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 22:18:38 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:25363 alt.magick:211315 alt.magick.goetia:497 alt.christnet.demonology:11780 alt.satanism:157224

50000925 Vom
 
Carroll 'Poke' Runyon's "Magick & Hypnosis":
>>>>#  	Victorian forbears of The Golden Dawn were not able to 
>>>>#	reconstruct the old method of magical evocation because 
>>>>#	they refused to accept its hypnotic basis. 

boboroshi:
>>>> upon what do you base this claim about the Golden Dawn members?
>>>> would they agree with you? why do you bother with their techniques
>>>> if they were ignorant of its basis in actual use? could it be that
>>>> their symbolism contains qualities which aren't immediately
>>>> obvious to those who use them and might become so within the 
>>>> context of trance state the way you're using it? what I'm trying
>>>> to get at here is why are you convinced that the GD symbolism is
>>>> truly worthwhile?

Mr. Runyon's new sock-puppet, Hoodoni@debukum.com (Hoodoni):
>In the early 1500s Abbot Trithemius collected, rectified and codified
>the scattered fragments of the European medieval magical
>tradition.Some years later his student Henry Agricola published a
>compendium of this work. 300 years later W.W. Westcott and his
>colleagues of the British Rosecrucian Society and the Golden Dawn
>brought about the second great codification of Western magical
>correspondences. As we have often pointed out: you can make magick on
>Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck, but if you value tradition, the Golden
>Dawn in the West is the best and most complete system.

ok, this answers question #05 (is the Golden Dawn material worthwhile?).
you think it is, even if they aren't using it right, because it is
based on Agricola's compendium of Trithemius' collection of European
medieval magical texts. thanks. that wasn't so difficult.

>This is not to say that the Golden Dawn magicians were that competent
>in practice. They severely culture-bound in their practical methods.
>The magicians of Trithemius and Agrippa's time used dark mirrors and
>crystal balls extensively as conjuration devices. The Golden Dawn
>magicians never used them.

thank you for answering this question.
  
>The Golden Dawn forced their initiates to forego hypnotic methods by
>oath....

>Dion Fortune was not a member of the Golden Dawn. She was at 
>various times in her life a Pagan, a Christian, a person who believed
>that magick was entirely psychological with no non-human entities, and
>at times --under other influences-- she may have entertained the
>"ectoplasm" belief (ugh)....

thanks for your perspective.

>If you don't know, what are you doing acting as an "authority" on
>alt.magick? 

 
	There you go again, trying to turn the conversation
        toward personalities. I won't fall for the bait, Mr. Runyon.
								
blessed beast!

boboroshi
Satanic Outreach Director,
Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
-- 
FREE HOODOO CATALOGUE! send street address to: catalogue@luckymojo.com
mailto:nagasiva@luckymojo.com ; http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html ; mailto:boboroshi@satanservice.org ; http://www.satanservice.org/ 
emailed replies may be posted; cc replies if response desired

Path: typhoon.sonic.net!not-for-mail
From: boboroshi@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE)
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.magick.goetia,alt.pagan.magick,alt.christnet.demonology,alt.satanism
Subject: Goetia Evasion of Questions? (was Goetia Evocation...)
Organization: Sonoma Interconnect,Santa Rosa,CA(us),http://www.sonic.net
Lines: 428
Sender: yronwode@sonic.net
Message-ID: <8qp8ri$4bt@bolt.sonic.net>
References: <8qg92q$hsh@bolt.sonic.net> <20000922201453.07845.00000452@ng-da1.aol.com> <8qhbj4$9cu@bolt.sonic.net> <39cde470.5236401@news.earthlink.net> <39d0bc0c.6051063@news.earthlink.net> <39d0ce2e.10694010@news.earthlink.net> <39d0d4d9.12400702@news.earthlink.net>
Reply-To: boboroshi@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE)
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.4 (NOV)
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 04:24:30 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.201.224.36
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 969942270 208.201.224.36 (Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:24:30 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:24:30 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:25361 alt.magick:211312 alt.magick.goetia:496 alt.pagan.magick:24797 alt.christnet.demonology:11779 alt.satanism:157219

50000925 Vom

below are the questions that I asked in my review of "Magick and Hypnosis".
notice that I am having to, effectively, pull teeth, to get some solid
responses out of Mr. Runyon (Gnome/Hoodoni/whatever-sockpuppet-today),
though he has not explained why he won't just respond directly to queries.
I'm beginning to fill in the blanks for him, using his 4 part essay and
my own interpetation of his brief, if sniping, commentary elsewhere. in
some measure I'll forge a means by which to compehend his contentions
more easily and assist him in his expression.

from the text of Mr. Runyon's "Gnosis" essay, "Magick & Hypnosis":
#	hypnosis is the operative technique of Ceremonial Magick. 
#	Visions of Spirits appearing in the Triangle of Art are 
#	actually archetypes evoked from the deep-mind via hypnotic 
#	induction.

boboroshi's recapitulation of his previous questions: 
> 01: if this is true, then why does it matter whether one evokes to a
>     visual appearance (to the mage)? as long as one is perceptive
>     enough and in tune with one's own faculties of imagination, why
>     would evocation to any kind of communication (even merely sonic) 
>     be enough?

I can only guess that he feels that the visual appearance is necessary
in order to fix the spirit within the Triangle. I'll consider this one
answered based on my conjecture.
  
> 02: several times you mention Jungian archetypes in the collective 
>     unconscious. you believe that these are as Jung described them?
>     what evidence do you have which leads you to believe that these 
>     are real, or as you put it "a reality that goes beyond anyone's 
>     individual conception" and "contains the entire history of the 
>     human race and probably the destiny of mankind"?

unanswered. perhaps he has joined the Cult of Jung. his review of Noll
seems to suggest this. I'll consider this one covered too based on his
fervency about the issue.
 
#	As Dion Fortune put it: "Magick is the art of causing changes 
#	in consciousness to occur in accordance with the will" 
> 
> 03: does this mean that you believe that ALL magic is effectively merely
>     psychological, as compared to enabling the magician to affect the
>     world outside hir mind? or do you have some explanation for why what
>     Hermetics call "Low Magic" works?

due to Mr. Runyon's abusive reponse about how "stupid" I am to ask such
a question, I gather that he believes that humans are simply powerful
enough to wish or believe things into being, and that this is how Low
Magic works. thus question #03 appears to have been answered in a
separate post.
 
#  	Victorian forbears of The Golden Dawn were not able to 
#	reconstruct the old method of magical evocation because 
#	they refused to accept its hypnotic basis. 
> 
> 04: upon what do you base this claim about the Golden Dawn members?

apparently Mr. Runyon meant that by 'forebears' Westcott and Mathers,
yet has said little about modern Golden Dawn members and their ideas
about ectoplasmic and material manifestations. he hasn't yet replied
to my query about Dion Fortune's obvious belief in ectoplasm and its
incitement to material manifestation, though she also spoke of mediums,
and so we can consider this answered also.

> 05: would the GD agree with you [that the goetic evocation is an
>     entirely self-hypnotic psychotherapy]? why do you bother with 
>     their techniques if they were ignorant of its basis in actual 
>     use? could it be that their symbolism contains qualities which 
>     aren't immediately obvious to those who use them and might 
>     become so within the context of trance state the way you're 
>     using it? what I'm trying to get at here is why are you 
>     convinced that the GD symbolism is truly worthwhile?

Mr. Runyon has claimed that my subsequent paragraphs contradict this one,
and that I answer myself in some way. I'll watch for this, but consider
this set of queries essentially unaddressed except by bluster.
  
> there's one technique: smoking the triangle and trying to see the
> demons in the smoke during the rite.

regarding Crowley. it is not obvious how this is self-contradictory or
foolish.
 
> we seem to agree on this, though my experience is that for some,
> psychoactives can be a valuable tool for ritual (an ability to
> retain some level of skepticism is imperative, as can be, during 
> this period, a Magical Record to be reviewed when completely sober).

regarding psychoactives, as indicated. again, doesn't seem to be
relevant to the previous queries.

#	...magick and witchcraft are powerful psychodynamic systems, 
#	even in an exclusively subjective, phenomenologically 
#	conservative sense. The practice of "the art" and "the craft" 
#	is not as dangerous as our credulous Christian critics contend, 
#	but neither is it as frivolously dysfunctional as Cartesian 
#	pedants would suppose. We are the inheritors of a great ancient 
#	system of psychology perfected over thousands of years. It can 
#	bring much good and happiness to us and our associates or, like 
#	any of the major systems of knowledge, it can be misused with 
#	harmful effect. In magick and witchcraft, however, most 
#	malicious transitive operations tend to backfire because the 
#	would-be sorcerer does not understand the subjective nature of 
#	the art. (11.)
 
> 06: what danger is involved? are you talking about the detours of those
>     who discover their own symbol-system that you mention below? 
>
> 07: what is the range of repecussion which might be involved in a 
>     "backfire" of this type?

presumably 'would-be sorcerer' merely refers to the ceremonial magician
and Mr. Runion is speaking of the "detours" into personal symbol-systems
he mentions elsewhere. however, the 'backfire' question (07) remains 
unanswered.
  
> 08: do you think that some in the Hermetic culture *know* the 
>     limitations of their magick and yet initiate, train, or 
>     otherwise work with those with objective views such as these 
>     in the hopes that they'll 'come around'? ....

I've seen no response as yet to this query (08) either.
 
#	...the ability to stare at a fixed point, or symbol, for 
#	long periods of time without blinking or letting the 
#	eyes change focus.... ...is absolutely essential to 
#	...Almadel and Goetia operations. 
 
> 09: how so?

my guess is that the objective in perfecting this ability would be
to use it when looking at the darkened mirror, though why not
blinking or changing focus is important seems partially ambiguous.
my guess is that Mr. Runyon feels that the effectively means of
'trapping' the spirit in the Triangle is by getting a secure
sighting of it in the mirror and maintaining it. why this might be
the case is unknown, thus the question is partially answered based
on my guesses. 
 
#	It is important to note that such [Goetic] rituals [in which
#	the spirits may be interacted with] do not depend on the use 
#	of drugs or hysterical dancing preliminary to the experience.
> 
> 10: was there anyone who has suggested hysterical dancing as a preliminary?

unanswered, though not particularly important to an understanding
of Mr. Runyon's techniques or ideology, so I'll let it go.
 
> 11: what is the difference between 'building telesmatic images' 
>     and the evocation of a spirit? 
>
> 12: to which of the above (evocation, invocation, and projection) 
>     would you assign divination? why?

both of these remain unanswered.
 
#	Later, in the critique which always follows any magical 
#	operation, we are asked to recount what we have experienced. 
#	Some of these revelations are remarkable and often confirm 
#	our contention that the collective unconscious is truly a 
#	transpersonal dimension.
> 
> 13: I'm not sure what this contention means, however. ...
>     if this is what you mean by 'transpersonal', however. 
>     for example, I don't know if you'd use this contention to 
>     try to explain how "Low Magic" spells work.

apparently this is the case, from Mr. Runyon's harsh response about
my ignorance of the power of human beings.
 
> while I can appreciate this warning, and was previously going to
> ask you how you could be sure that there is only one set of symbols 
> useful for this ritual technique, I can understand that you are
> saying that Hermetic tradition has rarefied a set of parameters for
> ritual symbolism with which to work. I'd suggest in response that
> those who find traditional symbolism to be problematic in some way
> are not imprudent to look elsewhere for alternatives being used in
> any number of more modern variations or in "creating their own
> qabalah", as Crowley described it. while it may be more risky or
> subject the mage to otherwise avoidable traps and complexes which
> the traditional symbol system can sidestep, some aspects of this
> same tradition can be abrasive and dangerous to the personalities
> and/or background of the mage encountering it.
> 
> that is, I think that to suggest that traditional Hermetic
> symbolism is 'safe for everyone' is irresponsible, and prone to
> lead those not 'ready' for it into some of the same types of
> problems about which you are warning here (because the Hermetic
> tradition has its own imbalances of symbolism which those who 
> engage it find palatable on account of background and taste).
> this is especially possible if the bulk of Hermeticists (i.e.
> the Golden Dawn) have been doing it without even understanding
> its functional parameters (e.g. as a psychoanalytic tool).
> 
> some of these hazardous 'revealed' systems may prove to be more
> in tune with those who have problems with Hermetic tradition,
> though I don't expect that Hermetic mages would necessarily be
> aware of this. it is the rough equivalent of the biases which
> may be found in religious rituals (e.g. masses and their efficacy).

perhaps these are the paragraphs to which Mr. Runyon refers when he
tells me that I have contradicted myself. as I am merely attempting
to make *his* claims more clear, it is quite possible that I am
stating things in different ways, trying to draw him out. without
specific citation it is difficult to get his meaning.
 
#	Eliphas Levi (whom Crowley claimed as a previous incarnation) 
#	attempted a similar experiment to summon the shade of Apolonius 
#	of Tyana. Quite properly he used a mirror as a conjuration 
#	device, but he mistakenly thought that smoke on the altar would 
#	provide a substance for the spirit to use in building a visible 
#	form. He was successful, at least in the visualization, but 
#	banished before attempting communication. 
> 
> 14: I don't understand. if he was successful (and I wonder how anyone 
>     can tell, over this intervening period of years, that he was, 
>     given his lack of reliability about his reports), then why do you 
>     say that his thought about the smoke was "mistaken"?

is Levi one of these "forebears of the Golden Dawn" also? unknown. this
question (14) remains unanswered also, and I can only presume it is a
misunderstanding on someone's part, perhaps someone who wishes to
appear incapable of overstatement.

> 15: ...was the massage [of the medium by the magnetizer during the
>     goetic ritual] an innovation of your own, extending from the 
>     concepts of Mesmer, as above, perhaps building on Reich, or 
>     did you get this from elsewhere?

again unknown, presumably so. I'll consider this answered by my
guesses.
 
#	...all this work, as valuable as it may be, merely refines 
#	our ability to employ a phenomenon we still don't understand. 
> 
> if true, then how can you be sure that you are 'correctly' 
> proceeding and that Levi was 'mistaken'?

this seems to be a restatement of question 14, though with an 
additional inquiry about Mr. Runyon's certainty and self-promotion.
we can leave it off as an element of 14.
 
#	When we say 'traditional' we mean 'Golden Dawn' traditional. 
#	Although based on a Rabbinical structure, the 19th century 
#	G.D. system incorporates Tarot symbolism, and Pagan 
#	mythological archetypes. It has become standard for most 
#	students of Western magick.
> 
> 16: upon what "rabbinical system" is it your understanding that the
>     Golden Dawn was based upon?

the historical analyses of the Golden Dawn which I have online at my
disposal at

	http://www.luckymojo.com/altmagickfaq/gdref
and	http://www.luckymojo.com/altmagickfaq/gdref2

do not indicate that the Golden Dawn was based on any "rabbinical
system". what Mr. Runyon probably means here is that they used
the Lurianic Tree of Life as a lattice for their Herimetic ideas
and symbols. unless he wishes to clarify further I'll consider
that this is a clear answer to his question (based on his language).

at this point I'm going to review Mr. Runyon's response (which he
posted in four parts), leaving excerpts which seem to address the
questions remaining unanswered above (05, 07, 08, 09b, 11, 12, and 14).
  
Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume):
> Anyone childish enough to think he/she can conjure an alien
> "spirit" creature to visible (photographable) physical appearance with
> "ancient incantations" belongs in a lunatic asylum

a confirmation of one of my initial questions. typically goetic mages
obscure this aspect of their practice in order to seem powerful or to
make their activities seem more spooky.

> However, until the latter half of the 20th century, successful
> and replicatable methods of Goetic evocation remained inaccessible to
> anyone without clairvoyant ability....

> ...(More recently the obsessive and torturous  experiments of
> Steve Savedow have tended to confirm the dubious value of such
> inelegant approaches to the challenge of conjuration to visible
> appearance.)

again a reference, without specificity, of Mr. Savedow. perhaps
Mr. Runyon will eventually tell more details about his contention.

> * Neither of these writers [Nelson White/Donald Kraig] mentioned 
> the essential yoga and self-hypnosis training necessary to safely 
> practice the technique [of dark mirror goetic evocation],

17: why do you think this is?

> neither did they discuss the Jungian psyco-philosophical rationale
> behind the system in their initial works; White later mentioned
> hypnosis, and Kraig later mentioned Jung. --Gnome

17b: perhaps there is a diversity of opinion regarding cosmology.
 
> ...for a well trained O.T.A operator/receiver solo operations
> are as safe or safer than operator-controlled sessions.

this coincides with my own experiences and tentative conclusions.
group work is more difficult to successfully carry off, in part
because of the differences in personal character.

>         Tratakam yoga (the yoga of the "fixed gaze") is necessary to
> train receivers how to "look" at dark mirrors and crystal orbs. Most
> people haven't the faintest idea of how to look at a conjuration
> device. Tratakam develops the ability to stare at the device without
> studying it, contemplating it, or ( especially important) analysing
> the optical phenomena as they occur in the skrying process. 

compare the "3-D Books" in which one must shift beyond immediate focus
to reconstruct. between these and focussed meditation on candle flames
I've found these to be valuable methods to exercise this type of
attention.

here's more about the specific technique that I'd like to leave in
  for archival:
>          You'll need a triangle raised on an easel, a dark circular
> mirror to hang in the center of the triangle, some form of circle with
> four quadrants, a thurible on a short tripod to place before the
> triangle, charcoal and incense for the thurible, a pair of candle
> sticks that can be held in the receiver"s hands, a lamen of the proper
> metal (e.g. copper for Venus/Netsach ops), your wand and ring, and a
> black grease pencil to put the spirit's sigil on the mirror and on the
> polished lamen around the receiver's neck.
>        For a formal operation you should have at least a receiver, an
> incense server and an operator.
>        Preliminary meditation on the nature of the working is
> essential....
>        Circumambulation deosil to a drumbeat with a bell rung at each
> passing of the eastern quarter while overtone chanting.
>        Operator stands behind the receiver, works the wand up and down
> the psychic centers of the receiver's back while conjuring. We use
> only the First Conjuration, and we usually don't have to repeat it
> more than three times. . . 

this says nothing about "massaging the medium". interesting.

>       The operator should sense the contact, but should also ask the
> receiver: "Do you have a presence?" before welcoming the spirit.
        
> ....Now the receiver has been through the black-out phase and has the
> spirit in the mirror. 

whoa, did we miss something here? a "black-out phase"? was this described
in any detail? in going over the original text I can find no reference.
therefore this must constitute question number 18.

18: what is "the black-out phase"? 

presumably the "First Conjuration" (whatever this is) is used to 
summon the spirit into the mirror. probably a conjuration spell.

> He or she says "Yes, I have a presence." The
> operator welcomes the spirit (in the case of a Pagan God or Goddess
> the operator will apologize for the strong conjuration -- see *The
> Book of Solomon's Magick* -and venerate the deity). An oracle may be
> asked for and received. 

this answers question #12, concerning to which form of magic the
OTA assigns divination (evocation of a god, oracular).

>          The operator should not keep the spirit too long. This
> puts a strain on the dream state. We summon them and then we send 
> them away. We never let them fade out.
>            After the license to depart, snuff the candles, turn the
> lamen, cover the mirror and perform a closing Planetary Septagram
> (Lunar), followed by a LBRP. Close the temple in due form.

19: what does it mean to "turn the lamen"? (to the wall?)

>            Immediately sit down in the hermitage to carefully  LOG
> the experience and the information received; otherwise, like a dream,
> you will  lose it.

valuable advice.

>             This concludes our very brief introduction to modern
> Goetia theory and practice. If you want to pursue this subject
> further, we offer a complete course (75 minute video and 200 page
> book) expanding and detailing what we have covered in these three
> public information articles. 

this leaves questions 
	05 (in brief: is the GD worthwhile?), 
	07 (what does it mean for an operation to "backfire"?), 
	08 (do modern orders understand the 'key' but initiate 
	    those who misunderstand, figuring that they will 
	    'come around'?), 
	09b (does the rigidity of sighting trap the demon?), 
	11 (difference between building telesmatic images and 
	    evoking spirits?), 
	14 (if Levi was successful in his evocation, how can 
	    you be sure his ideas about smoke were mistaken?), 
	17 (why did White/Kraig neglect info about yoga and
	    hypnosis initially?), 
	18 (what is 'the black-out phase'?), and 
	19 (what does 'turn the lamen' mean?) 

unaddressed. I'm making it very easy for you to respond, Mr. Runyon.

if any others wish to attempt to answer these for Mr. Runyon and
save him from bothering, I'd appreciate it.

in another post I'll go on to review chapter two, "The Secret of 
the Dark Mirror", of Mr. Runyon's book "The Book of Solomon's 
Magick", to see if these questions are addressed there. my intent 
is to thoroughly understand his public statements on the subject 
and correlate this with modern goetic theories from others. I take
him seriously enough to wade through his bluster and sockpuppets 
and see what he has to say. I hope he will see my admiration for
his endeavors, even where I may ask questions about them.

blessed beast!

boboroshi
Satanic Outreach Director,
Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
-- 
FREE HOODOO CATALOGUE! send street address to: catalogue@luckymojo.com
mailto:nagasiva@luckymojo.com ; http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html ; mailto:boboroshi@satanservice.org ; http://www.satanservice.org/ 
emailed replies may be posted; cc replies if response desired

Path: typhoon.sonic.net!not-for-mail
From: boboroshi@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE)
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.satanism,alt.magick.goetia,alt.christnet.demonology,alt.magick,alt.pagan.magick
Subject: Re: Goetia Evocation Questions (was detours into unrelated items...)
Organization: Sonoma Interconnect,Santa Rosa,CA(us),http://www.sonic.net
Lines: 502
Sender: yronwode@sonic.net
Message-ID: <8qs6sg$qca@bolt.sonic.net>
References: <39d0bc0c.6051063@news.earthlink.net>  <8qr01r$usp@bolt.sonic.net> <39d11e02.19865608@news.earthlink.net>
Reply-To: boboroshi@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE)
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.4 (NOV)
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 07:09:06 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.201.224.36
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 970038546 208.201.224.36 (Wed, 27 Sep 2000 00:09:06 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 00:09:06 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:25414 alt.satanism:157436 alt.magick.goetia:517 alt.christnet.demonology:11815 alt.magick:211409 alt.pagan.magick:24819

50000926 Vom

Mr. Runyon, thank you for joining me in a serious discussion 
once more. I do truly appreciate it. to show this I will 
take your advice below.

boboroshi@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE):
>>        07 (what does it mean for an operation to "backfire"?),

Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume):
> When you get a spirit you didn't go for.... Quite a shocker
> even with me receiving. This is covered in detail in a chapter 
> of *The Book of Solomon's Magick.*

somewhat ambiguous. so when you get a spirit you didn't want,
like calling a wrong number, I'm assuming that's what you mean
by a 'backfire'. ok.



>>        09b (does the rigidity of sighting trap the demon?),
>
> The philosophical geometric confines of the creative tetrahedron
> traps the demon -- especially if the receiver believes it does or will
> ....This is of course "a willing suspension of disbelief" in the
> otherwise "miraculous." (Don't ask me to explain that; it is a
> "channeled" response.)

ambiguous answer. I'll watch for additional data below.

>>        11 (difference between building telesmatic images and
>>            evoking spirits?),
>
> You build up one, you call up the other.

well I was hoping for some more detail about the methods involved
in each. I kind of guessed both known beforehand and that both 
conform to certain composites. any other differences in practical 
method besides that one is effectively artificial and the other a 
kind of wild match?

>>        14 (if Levi was successful in his evocation, how can
>>            you be sure his ideas about smoke were mistaken?),
>
> Levi did his one-and-only evocation of Appolonius of Tyana in a
> dark mirror with smoke rising between him and the glass, very much the
> way we do it. (See Cavendish *The Black Arts*)

this interests me greatly. from Cavendish:

	Levi's description of this operation is strikingly simple
	and straightforward when compared to his usual high,
	rhapsodical style. He was persuaded to attempt it by
	a mysterious woman in black who said she was a friend of
	'Sir B____ L_____'. He prepared himself by fasting and
	abstinence for twenty-one days beforehand. ... The ceremony
	was conducted by Levi alone, without witnesses, in a room
	with four concave mirrors and an altar resting on a new
	white lambskin. The sign of the pentagram (a five-pointed
	star) was carved in the white marble top of the altar,
	around which was a magic circle -- a chain of magnetised
	iron -- as a barrier against evil forces. On the altar
	was a small copper chafing-dish with charred laurel and
	alder wood in it. Another chafing-dish stood at one side
	on a tripod. Levi wore a white robe -- the prevalence of
	white was to show the purity of his intentions and appeal
	to beneficent influences -- and on his head a wreath of
	vervain leaves entwined in a golden chain. Traditionally,
	vervain has the power to ward off demons. He held a
	brand-new sword in one hand and a copy of the ritual for
	for the ceremony in the other.

	Levi lit fires in the two chafing-dishes, so that the
	smoke would provide material from which the ghost could
	make itself a visible body, and chanted a long and
	mysterious incantation to summon the ghost from the
	world of shades.... He chanted in a low voice, gradually
	rising higher in pitch. The smoke eddied and floated
	about the altar. It seemed as though the earth began
	to shake and Levi's heart beat more quickly. He heaped
	more twigs on the fires and as the flames sprang up he
	saw in front of the altar the figure of the man, which
	dissolved and vanished away.

	Levi repeated the incantation. Something seemed to
	brighten in the depths of the mirror behind the altar
	and in it he saw a figure moving towards him. Closing
	his eyes, he three times summoned the ghost to appear.
	'When I again looked forth there was a man in front of
	me, wrapped from head to foot in a species of shroud,
	which seemed more gray than white; he was lean,
	melancholy and beardless.'

	Levi was frightened. His body felt abnormally cold and
	when he tried to speak he found that he could not
	articulate properly. He put one hand on the pentagram
	for protection and pointed his sword at the apparition,
	mentally ordering it to obey him. The figure became
	shadowy and disappeared. He commanded it to return.
	Something touched his sword-arm, which went numb to the
	elbow. He turned the point of the sword downwards. The
	figure immediately reappeared, but Levi felt a
	sensation of intense weakness and evidently fainted.

	Levi's arm was numb and painful for several days
	afterwards. The figure had not spoken, but the two
	questions he had meant to ask it seemed to have
	answered themselves in his mind. The answers were
	'death' and 'dead'. He did not believe that the figure
	was the ghost of Apollonius and he says that the
	preparation for the ceremony itself had the effect on
	his mind of 'an actual drunkenness of imagination',
	which might have caused hallucination, but he was
	convinced that he had seen and touched something real.
	------------------------------------------------------
	"The Black Arts", Richard Cavendish, 
		G.P.Putnam's Sons, 1967; pp. 34-36.
	________________________________________________

Cavendish refers to Levi's "Doctrine and Ritual", and I'm going
to elaborate from Levi himself:

	The preliminaries terminated on the 24th of July:
	it was proposed to evoke the phantom of the divine
	Apollonius and interrogate it upon two secrets, one
	which concerned myself and one which interested the
	lady. She had counted on taking part in the evocation
	with a trustworthy person, who, however, proved
	nervous at the last moment, and, as the triad or
	unity is indispensable for Magical Rites, I was left
	to my own resources. The cabinet prepared for the
	evocation was situated in a turret; it contained four
	concave mirrors and a species of altar having a white
	marble top, encircled by a chain of magnetised iron.
	The Sign of the Pentagram... was graven and gilded on
	the white marble surface; it was inscribed also in
	various colours upon a new white lambskin stretched
	beneath the altar. In the middle of the marble table
	there was a small copper chafing-dish, containing
	charcoal of alder and laurel wood; another chafing-
	dish was set before me on a tripod. I was clothed in
	a white garment, very similar to the alb of our
	catholic priests, but longer and wider, and I wore
	upon my head a crown of vervain leaves, intertwined
	with a golden chain. I held a new sword in one hand,
	and in the other the Ritual. I kindled two fires with
	the requisite prepared substances, and began reading
	the evocations of the Ritual in a voice at first low,
	but rising by degrees. The smoke spread, the flame
	caused the objects upon which it fell to waver, then
	it went out, the smoke still floating white and slow
	about the marble altar; I seemed to feel a quaking
	of the earth, my ears tingled, my heart beat quickly.
	I heaped more twigs and perfumes on the chafing-
	dishes, and as the flame again burst up, I beheld
	distinctly, before the altar, the figure of a man of
	more than normal size, which dissolved and vanished
	away. I recommenced the evocations and placed myself
	within a circle which I had drawn previously between
	the tripod and the altar. Thereupon the mirror which
	was behind the altar seemed to brighten in its depth,
	a wan form was outlined therein, which increased and
	seemed to approach by degrees. Three times, and with
	closed eyes, I invoked Apollonius. When I again
	looked forth there was a man in front of me, wrapped
	from head to foot in a species of shroud, which seemed
	more grey than white.
	-----------------------------------------------------
	"Transcendental Magic", Eliphas Levi, 
		Bracken Books, 1995; pp. 153-154.
	_____________________________________________

some observations: 

	1) this is a NECROMANTIC, rather than a GOETIC ritual.
	   I don't know whether this matters much, in terms of
	   whether ghosts as compared to goetic spirits might
	   fare better with certain methods of evocation.

	2) Levi seems not to discern between *invoking* and
	   *evoking*, speaking on the one hand of "evocations"
	   as the spoken elements of the ritual and "invoking"
	   the spirit of Apollonius three times. considering
	   Levi's relation to ceremonialism (he seems more of
	   a romantic fabricator and compiler of data),
	   we must presume he's using the terms interchangeably
	   but meaning evocation (the spirit appears before him).

	3) in the context of this review of the OTA ceremonial
	   techniques, Levi speaks of seeing the spirit as
	   being 'in front of him'. His mention of the mirror
	   just prior this manifestation could easily be
	   interpreted as a key to a switch between mediumistic
	   rather than physicalist observations.

Colin Wilson adds a little more telling of how

	even E.M. Butler, who remarks that [Levi's] so-called
	science 'becomes more transparently bogus with every page 
	one turns,' [author's note: E.M. Butler, *Ritual Magic*, 
	1949, pp. 283 et seq.] is willing to accept his account 
	of raising the spirit of Apollonius of Tyana, as 
	described in Chapter 13 of *Transcendental Magic*.
	According to Levi, a mysterious lady, an adept, showed
	him her magical 'cabinet,' and asked him to evoke the
	spirit of Apollonius to ask it a question. The 'cabinet'
	was a room in a turret, with concave mirrors, a marble
	altar, a copper tripod and a white lambskin rug. He
	observed a vegetarian diet for three weeks before the
	invocation and had to fast completely for the last
	seven days; during all this time he meditated on
	Apollonius and held imaginary conversations with him.
	At the end of twelve hours of magic incantations (all
	detailed in the appendix of *Transcendental Magic*),
	the shade of Apollonius appeared in a kind of grey shroud.
	----------------------------------------------------------
	"The Occult", Colin Wilson, Random House, 1971; p. 328.
	_______________________________________________________

since the copy of Levi's text I have in my library didn't have
an appendix (only "The Supplement to the Ritual"), I thought
this was valuable information (preparatory at least -- note
that in "Transcendental Magic", Levi prescribes 40 days to the
student, rather than his 21, of ascetic conditioning prior to 
rituals; his reputation for practical expertise or historical 
reliability is, shall we say, not the best :>). 

however, while researching possible additional material on Levi's
necromancy, I ran across some other lovely Cavendish material
(like you, Mr. Runyon, I enjoy his text quite a bit). here he
describes in some plain language a metaphysics which explains
the background of that accepted by the OTA:

	Levi coupled Mesmer's theories with the notion of the
	astal body by identifying animal magnetism as the
	'astral light', a universal medium in some ways
	analogous to the all-pervading 'ether' of the nine-
	teenth-century physics. This enabled him to restate
	the old tradition that the ultimate reality is a unity
	compounded of opposites. Like a magnet, the astral light
	has opposite poles. It carries good and evil, it
	transmits light and propagates darkness. It responds to
	the human will and the astral body is formed of it. It
	is the astral light, he says in *The Key of the 
	Mysteries*, which is 'the fluidic and living gold' of
	alchemy and to control it is to master all things.
	'To direct the magnetic forces is then to destroy or
	create forms; to produce to all appearance, or to
	destroy bodies; it is to exercise the almighty powers
	of Nature.'

	Influenced by Mesmer's belief that animal magnetism
	could be mentally controlled, and perhaps also by
	Agrippa, Levi claimed limitless power for the trained
	magician's will. 'To affirm and will what ought is to
	create; to affirm what ought not to bbe is to destroy.'
	All the procedures and trappings of ritual magic, for
	him, were devices through which the magician concen-
	trated and directed his will. They were part of the
	network of correspondences, which Levi brought back
	into magical theory in a modified, psychological form.
	The correspondences were links between the universe
	and the human soul, which contained in miniature all
	factors existing in the world outside it.
	----------------------------------------------------
	"A History of Magic", Richard Cavendish, 
		Arkana Books, 1987; pp. 135-136.
	_____________________________________________

this seems to summarize in brief the launching point from which
Mr. Runyon and his order have integrated at least Jungian ideas,
if not extending Mesmer into Reichian territory. it also shows
us more about how much Crowley drew from Levi in his theories
about will in his system of magicK.



>>        18 (what is 'the black-out phase'?), and
>
> In the facial reflection/distortion method of conjuration to
> visible appearance (Bloody Mary) the receiver does tratakam (fixed
> gaze stare) at his or her reflection--seen within the sigil of the
> spirit which has been drawn on the surface of the glass-- in the dark
> mirror, flanked by hand-held candles, until a "black-out"
> occurs---then what next appears will be a distortion (morphed) that
> will be accompanied by a sense of alien presence.... 
> (This is also covered in .... *Secrets of the Dark Mirror* ....)

from the review below we can discern that the black-out is a space
of time wherein the visual image within the mirror is lost.

>>        19 (what does 'turn the lamen' mean?)
> The receiver wear a lamen with the sigil of the spirit face up
> (see the Goetia). On the backside is a pentagram (i.e. a banishing
> symbol). When the spirit is told to depart, the operator turns the
> lamen, facing the pentagram to the mirror.

very clear, thank you for explaining this part.

> ...Now I really do suggest that you (and anyone else who is
> interested) go to our web site and download *Secrets of the Dark
> Mirror.*....)
>Come visit us at http://members.aol.com/CHSOTA/productions.html

reviewed here:

#	The Goetia (pronounced Go-EY-sha) cataloged and described
#	72 rebellious spirits that, according to a Talmudic legend, 
#	old King Solomon has imprisoned in an enchanted Brass vessel 
#	submerged in a lake in Babylon. This read like a fabulous 
# 	tale from The Arabian Nights but in my irrational state I 
#	was convinced that there was a hidden truth behind the 
#	fantastic story. Like Aladdin's wonderful lamp or Ali Baba's 
#	'Open Sesame' there was a Secret Key to calling up those 
#	mighty princes of the Jinn that Solomon had imprisoned so 
#	long ago -- and I was determined to find it.

so you were predisposed to finding something new.

#	If I hadn't been touched with divine madness at the time I 
#	probably would have accepted the Victorian reconstruction 
#	of magick and put aside my yearning to actually conjure 
#	spirits to visible appearance in Solomon's Triangle of Art. 
#	I would have agreed with critics like Professor Eliza Butler 
#	that those who practiced out of the old grimoires were 
#	credulous and self-deluded.

so you do agree that there is a difference between what you do and
'conjuring spirits to visible appearance in the Triangle of Art'.

#	I knew there had to be a way to make Solomon's traditional 
#	operations actually work without resorting to drugs, fasting 
#	or endless conjurations to produce hallucinations through 
#	hysteria and exhaustion.

this also indicates more of your predisposition. interesting.

# [apparently quoting Crowley]
#	...
# 	The names of God are vibrations calculated to establish:
#		General control of the brain. (Establishment of 
#			functions relative to the subtle world.)
#		Control over the brain in detain. (Rank or type of spirit.)
#		Control of one special portion. (Name of the spirit.) 
#	...

19: what does "the brain in detain" mean?  "brain in detail"?

#	I could place a crystal ball into the triangle, but then if I 
#	stood back inside the magick circle, as the operator was 
#	supposed to do according to the ancient texts, even a 60mm 
#	ball would appear the size of a door knob -- but I knew 
#	something had to be placed in that triangle: something 
#	fascinating, something hypnotic, and something large enough 
#	to provide a viewing surface. Obviously the speculum, the 
#	dark mirror.

I'm quoting the previous and subsequent paragraphs as indicative of 
your discovery process....

#	The secret was in a work called Tantra, The Yoga of Sex by 
#	Omar Garrison published in 1964. In this book the author 

#	explained an ancient Oriental method of conjuring up images 
#	of previous incarnations from the reflection of one's own 
#	face in a dark mirror flanked by candles!
#
#	...
#
#	If a person in a darkened room stares for several minutes 
#	into a mirror flanked by candles, a strange phenomenon will 
#	almost always happen: the familiar reflection will fade out 
#	and disappear. The mirror will go black and, when the image 
#	returns, it will be the face of someone or something else!

here is your "black-out phase". obviously the person does not 
black-out (somewhat confusing initially), but the image in the 
mirror is lost. thanks.

#	After this discovery the use of the magick mirror in an 
#	elevated triangle seemed obvious. Our late 17th century 
#	Lemegeton manuscript, Sloane 2731, clearly shows a large 
#	black-filled circle in the center of Solomon's Triangle. 
#	...the instructions written around the Triangle say: 
#	"Two foot off from the Circle and three foot over." ...
#	Not "Three foot across," as the published version has it. 
#	The Triangle was intended to be raised up to eye level. 
#	This is clearly shown in a drawing from a 17th century 
#	manuscript by the mysterious D. Thomas Rudd, which depicts 
#	a mirror on a stand with Solomon's Secret Seal from the 
#	Goetia of the Lemegeton clearly rendered on the reverse side. 

interesting technique. this explains why you consider your method
to be fairly unusual or unique, due to the selection of Sloane 
manuscripts and the configuration you've set up for evocation.

#	...polished obsidian mirrors were used in the neolithic 
#	Middle Eastern city of Katal Hyuck  as far back as nine 
#	thousand years ago -- before the Great Flood. And later, 
#	in the time of Solomon, the Egyptians and Canaanites made 
#	mirrors of polished copper and of silver, metals 
#	attributed to the planet Venus and the Moon.
#
#	...
#
#	...The use of the magic mirror -- which was made of metal 
#	or glass with a polished surface -- for seeing spirits, 
#	was known to the Arabs at an early period. The image was 
#	said to Appear in a cloud or vapor floating between the 
#	medium used and the gazer's eye.

#	...

thanks for this history of the magic mirror. I imagine that a
complete story would include the bits about PB Randolph at least.

#	Along with playing hopscotch on The Tree of Life, children 
#	have a game called "Bloody Mary" (Clive Barker's Candyman) 
#	which they have been scaring each other with as long as 
#	there have been mirrors to look into. 

very interesting. does anyone know of the origins of this 'Bloody
Mary' game, beyond Clive Barker? I've never heard of it in my
childhood, nor has anyone I've asked about it so far (few :>).

#	...this ancient system [dark mirror scrying] would work 
#	for any sincere person who could concentrate on a fixed 
#	point long enough to achieve a light hypnotic trance.

so the trance-time is the parameter for the fixed-point staring.
that is, if someone can achieve a trance quickly, then the ability
to stare seems to become less important.

#	...the process was just as effective if I -- as the 
#	magician --  stood behind a passive 'receiver' who would 
#	only need to hold the candle sticks and concentrate on 
#	the mirror.

#	At that time I was a bachelor in my thirties, living in a 
#	beach-side Southern apartment and riding a motorcycle. This 
#	put me in a position to recruit young women willing to 
#	transform into the Goddess Astarte. These experiments, 
#	harmless as they were, made me notorious.
#	...
#	It did appear that women made the best, or perhaps the most 
#	enthusiastic, receivers but for the most part my female 
#	volunteers were not clairvoyant.

some connection between this and the integration of massage? :>

#	Those few who were natural psychics would receive their 
#	vision 'off-face' after the mirror blacked out. Non-psychic 
#	receivers (most of us) will see a different face replace 
#	our familiar reflection. However, it is important to note 
#	that this transformation process for non-psychics is, if 
#	anything, a more intense and consciousness-altering 
#	experience than the more familiar visioning process the 
#	psychic undergoes.

again very interesting and seems quite clearly described. important
supplementary practical details.

#	The Book of Solomon's Magick  may be ordered direct 
#	from the publisher, C.H.S., Inc.,  for $24.95 postpaid 
#	in U.S. ($26.95 Canada).

thanks for giving us a glimpse.

questions still unanswered as of this time:


	9c what traps the demon?

I'm not sure what "philosophical geometric confines of the creative 
tetrahedron" means. I don't remember your mention of a tetrahedron.
is there some kind of additional visualization to which you alluded
or which I missed during the evocation of which I'm unaware?
 
	11 differences in telesmatic and goetic methods?

the way you described your technique it is possible that you use the
same ritual methods to achieve different effects (as with divination
when you call up deities for oracular results). I was curious as to
whether your building up of a telesmatic image was achieved within
the same ceremonial parameters of if you did it some other way.

I'm fairly familiar with concepts about telesmatic images from
reading authors like Gray, but the ceremonial, practical particulars
are not always included by ritualists. 

19: what does "the brain in detain" mean?  "brain in detail"?

this is Crowley's text being quoted I'm fairly sure. even if the
text reads 'brain in detail' I'm not sure I understand it or why
it would be important to you to quote it. physico-psychological?

regards,

blessed beast!

boboroshi
Satanic Outreach Director,
Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)