From: Tim Maroney Area: ENOCHIAN To: Bobby Meizer 17 Apr 92 10:45:24 Subject: RE: Re: Enochian Works UpdReq Thanks for the information. I've expressed this view to quite a few people so far, and you're the only one who actually knew the pronunciation of "Enoch". From now on, "Hah-noak-ee-un" it is. Do we agree that "Ee-noak-ee-un" is an affectation? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Bobby Meizer Area: ENOCHIAN To: Azoth 17 Apr 92 15:04:46 Subject: RE: Re: Kenneth Grant Rec'd UpdReq -=> Quoting Lady ByrLB> people took a soundtrack that was made by a rather In a message to Lady Byron written on Saturday, April 11, 1992 at 0:33:26, Azoth writes: Azo> famous person to LB> the movie "Lucifer Rising" and bootlegged it after promising this LB> particular artist that he would get some of the profits. This artist LB> threw Ken Anger out after an argument and Anger bootlegged the LB> soundtrack with Zardoz. Needless to say, it went nowhere. I just LB> thought it was rather petty of a supposed ceremonial magickian. Azo> Sounds less to do with Grant, than it does Anger and Zardoz. There If Anger ever saw these messages he would probably sue you for libel. The record you are referring to was released under the aegis of Zardoz entirely. I have seen a letter from Anger to Zardoz in which Anger explicitly refuses to condone Zardoz's project, and in fact Anger's anger was one of the impetuses in Zardoz's expulsion from OTO. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Bobby Meizer Area: ENOCHIAN To: Tim Maroney 17 Apr 92 15:08:10 Subject: RE: Re: Enochian Works UpdReq Almost every pronunciation which purposely goes against the prevailing usage is an 'affectation'. What do you think of the pronunciation of 'magick' as "May-jick" (in conscious allusion to 'mage')? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Mark Newcomb Area: ENOCHIAN To: Gerald Del Campo 17 Apr 92 21:10:30 Subject: RE: Re: Technicalities... UpdReq 93! Well, hmmm... The difference between HGA and "GOD". So far (from my prospective) I see "GOD" as the wholistic being, and the HGA as part of it. The "link" to the divine, but not the "divine" being as a whole. As some belive there are several "bodies" we wear... ie: The physical, astral, mental, spiritual, and finally the divine. The HGA I see as the spiritual part, that part which is most directly in touch with the divine. The "divine" is (to me) the wholistic being... "GOD". The reflection of that which is below, as what is below is the reflection of that which is above. Hmmm, I probly am not making too much sence... so, I will just say that to me "GOD" is the sum of all and NONE. Lets try another example... Envision a circle with a point in the centre. The point is the infin poss, Hadit or me/you, the outer rim is the infin boundry that is Nuit (the divine), the comprisal of both is "the being" or if you will "GOD". Trying to explain something that is not a duality is rather annoying. ;) Well, I hope I have not been too confusing (I know I probly have). ;-) Mark Newcomb Fra.: Michael 111 Note: As for the "Oath", no, that was not OTO. As for what other order that is from, I am not at liberty to disclose that either. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Tim Maroney Area: ENOCHIAN To: Bobby Meizer 18 Apr 92 12:14:48 Subject: RE: Re: Enochian Works UpdReq I think "may-jick" as a pronunciation is a rather foolish affectation as well. But one learns to tolerate these little pomposities and pretensions when one moves among the magical community. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Bobby Meizer Area: ENOCHIAN To: Tim Maroney 18 Apr 92 12:34:56 Subject: RE: Re: Enochian Works UpdReq Is there an intended double entendre in the phrase "foolish affectation"? (see ya tomorrow nite, dude!) 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Bobby Meizer Area: ENOCHIAN To: Tim Maroney 16 Apr 92 23:28:54 Subject: RE: Re: Enochian Works UpdReq In a message to Mark Newcomb written on Tuesday, April 7, 1992 at 9:43:20, Tim Maroney writes: TM> "Ee-NOAK-ee-un" is just plain wrong! It's the prophet "EE-nok", not TM> "EE-noak". It's like people who say "Ee-LOY-sis" ehwn there isn't even an well, that IS the English pronunciation of the name, but the Hebrew name is pronounced "Hah-noak" (with that lovely guttural 'h'), so perhaps "Hah-noak-ee-un" IS acceptable. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Azoth Area: ENOCHIAN To: Bobby Meizer 19 Apr 92 16:28:60 Subject: Loose thread... Sent UpdReq Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the bloody Law. -=> Quoting Bobby Meizer to Azoth <=- LB> people took a soundtrack that was made by a rather Azo> Sounds less to do with Grant, than it does Anger and Zardoz. There BM> If Anger ever saw these messages he would probably sue you for libel. Tsk, tsk. I know little and care less about Zardoz, and my knowledge of Anger is limited to Equinox 3-10, but he, at least, presumably has better things to do than monitor these echoes for impertinent commentary on his past (mis)deeds. In any case, my own efforts at character assasination have been confined to Ken Grant, if you'd care to follow the thread back a little. Lady Byron is presumably speaking from first-, or at worst, second-hand knowledge. Take it up with her. Love is the law, love under bleedin' will. ... I See you when you're Sleeping, I Know when you're Awake... 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Azoth Area: ENOCHIAN To: Darrin Hyrup 19 Apr 92 17:11:40 Subject: Re: Enochiana Sent UpdReq Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. -=> Quoting Darrin Hyrup to Azoth <=- A> Tesseratic Magick? As in hypercubical Watchtowers and Moebius mantras? DH> Hehe, sort of. :) Space-time magick, via use of workings and DH> meditations involving hypersolids, and other extra-dimensional DH> magickal aids. Sounds _very_ much in the same vein as Rowe's Enochian Temple working. A> I shouldn't think, though, that fusion of the waking/dreaming awareness A> would thereby result. Maybe something along the lines of a Scientological A> Power process? DH> Not knowing anything about Scientology, I couldn't tell ya how well DH> that works. But NLP is very a powerful tool for mental DH> self-conditioning. I'm occasionally a little surprised that Scientology gets so little attention from practicing magickians, especially as some of the techniques seem to have a direct bearing on magickal attainment. I guess Fear of the Organization might have something to do with it, which is a shame, since the inner mythology of the cult is gnostic in the extreme. Everybody's heard of Hubbard's dealings with Parsons and the OTO by now, but I, at least, was surprised by LRH Jr.'s documentation in chapter 7 of _LRH:_Messiah_Or _Madman_, by Bent Corydon and LRH Jr., of the elder Hubbard's intense fascination with Liber AL, Abre-Melin, and IX OTO material. Anyway, chapter 10 of the same book lists the commands of the first 'Power' process, which is used to renovate one's ability to identify the 'source' of things, and a comment: "On the other hand, it was also said to be important that one be able to identify who or what was _not_ the source of something. The 'commands'(asked, in sequence, 1,2,3,4) are extremely elementary: Tell me a source. Tell me about it. Tell me a no source. Tell me about it." Much of the rest of the chapter deals with the _many_ important parallels between Crowley's Magick and Hubbard's Scientology. Fascinating stuff. Love is the law, love under will. ... Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Azoth Area: ENOCHIAN To: Lady Byron 19 Apr 92 18:09:12 Subject: Re: Kenneth Grant Sent UpdReq Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. -=> Quoting Lady Byron to Azoth <=- A> Sounds less to do with Grant, than it does Anger and Zardoz. There LB> Ah! I stand corrected! I had gotten the two confoozed. Apologies. So now you'll maybe pay a little more attention to Grant? Hmmmm? };-] A> Yes! Yes! Yes! ***k the Old Ones! They'd like that, A> I'm sure. Uh, hmmmm, which Old Ones are YOU referring to? LB> I have no idea, really. I'm reluctant to bow to anything, young or LB> old, however. Who were you referring to? In this case, those same ones called by the Abbe Boulan last century, though Crowley had a high regard for the Enochian elemental spirits, which are certainly old enough. In any case, to approach some of Those with Whom I've held converse with anything less than the most sincere humility and respect is folly bordering on stupidity, if only because They will rarely treat with anyone with such an imperfect appreciation of Humanity's place in the universe. This in no way implies servility, but a commonsense approach to certain basic facts. We don't play in traffic, or juggle gelignite....at least not for long. And those who are not, um, Themselves, but rather, _ourselves_, are even testier, and apt to rebound in ways detrimental, at least, to our sanity, since a significant portion of our Power resides therein. A> want to accomplish with the rite. Is the Haunter a magickian as well? LB> I doubt it. He died mad of syphilis(sp?) in the dungeon. I'll let LB> you know, though! Now wait a minute, let me get this straight: there's this motel, right? And you're going to do some magick there, right, because it's haunted? By someone that died in the ?? DUNGEON ?? Odd sort of motels they have out there.... Love is the law, love under will. ... There is no law beyond. Do what thou wilt. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718