Tarot of Ceremonial Magic Study Group - The Magus

DerNarr

smw said:
the shadow of the magus who,according to tradition, distorts and perverts the word of the Magus, thus making a mockery of his work, as do the Black brothers with their formula of duality.
Click to expand...

I just realized that my dislike of Hegelians (and more literal-minded Marxists) is probably not unlike the Wahabbi dislike of remnant Zoroastrians. Funny thought.

Great thread! And we are, in fact, literally made of stars, as the Schrijvers remind us, and f-35s aren't made to kill people, they're made to siphon off tax money. They will probably never fly a single real combat sortie, ever.
 

smw

DerNarr said:
I just realized that my dislike of Hegelians (and more literal-minded Marxists) is probably not unlike the Wahabbi dislike of remnant Zoroastrians. Funny thought..
Click to expand...

Hi DerNarr

I'm not following you there..though I just read that Zoroastrians can also be called 'Magi'(or Magians) the plural of Magus, the Magician. Also that their philosophy for one God, 'duality'of Good and evil, heaven hell etc was the seed for later monotheistic religions such as Christianity and Islam.
 

smw

Aeon418 said:
For ceremonial magicians only? There are aspects of the deck that may be useful in CM, but it's still just a Tarot deck. In fact, despite the crude artwork, it's possibly one of the 'easiest reading' decks I've ever used. That bit surprised me!


Crowley had a bit of thing about that. He ticked off Grady McMurtry when he caught him thumbing through his copy of Abramelin.


Unless you're especially sensitive I can't see any harm in just looking at the sigils. Neither do I see any reason to be overly panicky or fearful about them. But unless you're proficient with some form of banishing ritual it's probably not a good idea to obsessively brood over them for extended periods of time.
Click to expand...

Hello Aeon :)

Thanks for your reply.

Sorry about that. I think I might have confused the issue by responding generally to the discussion and getting an impression from that . Thanks for your clarification. I did post previously and lost it by being too slow. Probably a good thing, I was starting to waffle.
 

ravenest

smw said:
Well, I am confused as to this deck now, or how the study group moves on.

My understanding of the views put forward, is that the deck is for ceremonial magicians only and those ideally at Practicus level, with the protection of their HGA. Without being at this level it may be unwise or possibly lethal to explore them due to their automatic nature and stirring up of your own Qliphotic aspects.

If that advice is taken on board, how would that fit with continuing exploration of this deck and the sigils? even if by more experienced people? For others, following any discussion or outlining of the sigils, wouldn't that still mean looking and thinking about them, possibly bringing up their their automatic affect?
Click to expand...

what 'automatic effects' ?
 

ravenest

Aeon418 said:
That's one reason why I suggested the textual portion of Arcanorum. It is a sort of commentary on the sigils, after a fashion.


But how did you get them in the first place? I'm sure you know the procedure for dealing with spiritual hierarchies as well as I do.

1. Divine name.
2. Archangel.
3. Angel.
4. Intelligence.
5. Spirit.
6. Spirit/Genni. (See Liber XXII)
7. Qliphoth. (See Liber XXII)

Did you leave steps 6 and 7 blank as you worked your way down the ladder. Or did you have make do and use what was provided until something else presented itself as suitable for you personally?
Click to expand...
Closer to the 2nd ... more of a case of 'chicken and egg' - taking the point that evolution came up with eggs, long before she came up with chickens ;)
Aeon418 said:
In a way it's like the practice of substituting the name Aiwass in place of a persons own HGA name. Aiwass (being numerically 93=418) is such a general and broard symbol of the True Will and the Great Work that any particular personal manifestations are merely specialisations of that general principle. [/QUOTE}

I was uncomfortable with that the first time I used it, I soon changed ... the 'egg' is more evolved nowadays ... less chance of a T-rex popping out .
Aeon418 said:
And that's the same reasoning behind Crowley's standard test in the Neophyte exam. As part of that exam the aspirant is required to skry the qliphoth of their own sun sign. But this takes place at the conclusion of the Neophyte work. I'm sure I don't need to quote Liber Librae to you and the importance of a 'sure foundation'.
Click to expand...
yes please :)

(actually, I 'm in the process of redoing the cabin's foundations... why didn't those idiots do it better in the first place ! I got the whole thing jacked up, holes, cement mixing, dragging concrete blocks under there .... :mad:

;) ... its true though.

Aeon418 said:
Not necessarilly. There is no exam or testing of this material at 3=8. It is provided as another 'tool' that may or may not be useful to the particular needs of the aspirant at that time. (The seeds planted here may flower later on.) However the 3=8 still needs some degree of familiarity with the material.


Locking up in prision is Lon's interpretation. You would have to ask him what he means by that.
Click to expand...

Nah ... he seems more a blogger (tell you ) and not forum poster ( where people are going to challenge what the hell he means ) .
Click to expand...
 

ravenest

smw said:
Hi DerNarr

I'm not following you there..though I just read that Zoroastrians can also be called 'Magi'(or Magians) the plural of Magus, the Magician. Also that their philosophy for one God, 'duality'of Good and evil, heaven hell etc was the seed for later monotheistic religions such as Christianity and Islam.
Click to expand...

Not really, Magi were a specific sect or branch of Zoroastrianism, like priests but also in some cases like a tribe - think of the Levites ... that sort of thing. They were more a product of Zurvanism, a 'theology' of Zoroastrianism that tried to deal with the 'duality of monotheism' .

You can add Judaism to the list ... Zoroastrianism, and specifically pre-Zoroastrian 'Mazda worship', well predates the 'creation' of Jewish scripture. Many features of Zoroastrian 'lore' can be seen in the main ideas in 'Abrahamic Religions' ; good and evil, 'paradise' Noah's ark story, flood story, angels, ....

But the whole aim and practice was something totally different to what religion came to mean .
 
Book of Law Study Group 1.1 The Devil-Thoth