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
From: bloodofenoch@goddamnfruit.com (Andralphus)
Subject: Re: 'Real' vs. 'Fake' Grimoires (was necronomicon)
Date: 6 Apr 2002 06:36:46 -0800

ny'rl'th't'p  wrote in message news:...
> bloodofenoch@goddamnfruit.com (Andralphus):
> >bufferm4n@hotmail.com (Paul) wrote in message news:<5cc56cfe.0203301948.b4f09c6@posting.google.com>...

Thanks for the reply, nagasive/nyarlathotep.

> > The Simon Necronomicon takes a bunch of stuff from classical ritual
> > magick, dumbs it down, and paints a veneer of Sumerian mythology over
> > it.
> 
> some problem with doing this? lots of Llewellyn books are dumber and
> less valuable. why cap on the Simonomicon? you have a beef with him?

Okay, let me phrase the beef thus: the Simon book is no worse than a
lot of Llewellyn stuff.  I'd say that's damning by faint praise. ;)

> > ... why bother with a thrown-together literary hoax 
> 
> is it one? is it your impression that the Simonomicon pretends to be
> something that it is not? why, if so?

It does.  Read the intro.  

> > when you can go to the original?  
> 
> HPL? LOL 

Touche'.

> > Try "Aleister Crowley's Illustrated Goetia" or "The Enochian World 
> > of Aleister Crowley" by Lon Milo Duquette.  Or "The Book of 
> > Solomon's Magick" by C.R. Runyon.
> 
> not quite the puzzle or entertainment.
> 
> > The Goetic and Enochian systems have evolved, been tested, 
> 
> the Goetia reads like a third-grader constructed its puny directory
> from amongst 10-15 mix-n-match 'characters' of 'demons'. it lacks
> creativity beyond the wild imagination of the author at points
> where describing the spirits. it is not my impression that this
> text is more than an amusement amongst magicians 

I think the Goetia is an extremely valuable exercise, especially for
GD style ceremonial magicians (like myself, more or less).  The Goets
are part of a completely different paradigm than the angels and
elementals you normally work with in CM, and can jolt you out
too-comfortable ways of seeing and dealing with the world.

  "Now hear a plain fact: Swedenborg has not written one new truth:
Now hear another: he heas written all the old falsehoods.
  "And now hear the reason.  He conversed with Angels who are all
religious, & conversed not with Devils who hate all religion, for he
was incapable thro' his conceited notions." - Blake, Marriage of
Heaven and Hell.

> where it fails to
> become a mechanism by which the clever psycho-analyst attempts to
> get in touch with their deep mind...

I hate this justification for the Goetia.  There are plenty of much
safer ways of getting in touch with 'the deep mind'.  Ultimately the
only justification can be fun.

> > and successfully worked by generations of magicians.  
> > They work, and they work well.  
> 
> how can you tell? success stories? to what end? are there people
> winning lotteries after having consulted with treasure-finding
> goetic demons? not of which I am aware.

I don't generally use the Goets to achieve material results.  My
success stories are simply the times I've talked with demons.

> > The Simonomicon was slapped together haphazardly in order
> > to sell books, and not well thought out as a system for working.
> 
> why were the Goetic documents created? can you be so sure of their
> original intent and method?

This is a good point.  I won't pretend that the Goetia does not have a
dodgy past.  It does.

I guess what it comes down to is that I personally would have a hard
time taking the Necronomicon seriously as a working magickal system,
knowing it to be an invention of a pulp science fiction writer.  That
may just be me, but I suspect not.

> >> does it have any practical value? do the spells work?
> >
> > If you don't know any better, yes.
> 
> toward what end? as has been said in these magical forms, if you
> believe that intention or faith is all that is truly required,
> then how will you determine an "authoritative" grimoire?? in 
> fact, there is no such thing outside what the magician finds so
> convincing, given the make-believe-and-it-turns-real paradigm.

The other thing that makes me recommend Goetia and Enochian is that
they have a tradition behind them: their existence depends on more
than the first section of the Lemegeton and Dee's diaries.  They have
been developed and refined; new things have been added (like Crowley's
Bornless Invocation or Runyon's mirror).  Other things have been
de-emphasized and gradually slipped away from common usage (like some
of the more elaborate equipment; the use of the demons for treasure
hunting).

These refinements have made the system more workable.  Therefore I
recommend it.

As AgnosticGnostic pointed out, this is a hopelessly retrograde and
conservative position, and if everyone followed it there would be
nothing new or interesting in magick.   I suppose this is the case,
but I'm not particularly inclined to reinvent the wheel every time I
do a magickal working.

There's also new and interesting in the sense of exterior trappings
and new and interesting in terms of experience.  I (more or less) use
the standard-form Goetic conjurations; in that sense nothing new or
interesting is happening.  But when Asmoday appears to me, I'm fairly
certain that it's a much different Asmoday than ever appeared to
anyone else before.  That is new and interesting, to me at least.

Have a good day,

- Andralphus