From: Kai Mactane Area: MagickNet To: Fir 14 Sep 94 14:49:12 Subject: Descent to the underworl UpdReq -> Ygr'th na Fir zwan Josh Norton ngah'wlaq -> r'hylth Descent to the underworld, n'qah? Fi> I'm looking at various mythologies for descents into the Fi> underworld. Fi> Also I'm interested in various mythological figures who walk Fi> between the worlds, here and in the underworld. I know that Fi> Anubis is one. Isn't the Hermes/Thoth/Tahuti archetype another? Yes to Hermes/Thoth (the "Golden Mean" between them seems to me to be Hermes Trismegistus). As for others, what about Prince Pwyll of the first Branch of the Mabinogion? He goes to Annwfn (a very pleasant Welsh underworld) at the request of its ruler, Arawn. As a result of this trip, a profitable trade and alliance is set up between the two kingdoms. In Insular Celtic lore, Mannanan macLir is the God of the Sea and voyages undertaken on it. Though such mythos have no easily identifiable psychopomp-figure, Mannanan is pretty close. Irish folklore is also full of descents into fairy-mounds. --Kai MacTane. ... Punishment should be cruel and unusual, it works better. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.10 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Paul Hume Area: MagickNet To: Josh Norton 15 Sep 94 09:40:06 Subject: Descent to the underworl UpdReq Fir and Josh - Add Inanna's descent (also into the realm of Nergal), Izanagi's trip to Yomi (Shinto - and not popularh H// as a working, as contact with dead things in Shinto requires massive purification). Different take on crossroads guardian, but Hekate wears that hat as well (though as a giver of occult knowledge, she may share traits with the Thoth-Hermes complex). Paul 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Paul Hume Area: MagickNet To: Mike Ruiz 16 Sep 94 03:38:58 Subject: Positive UpdReq Mikey - OK, now I get it - you were freaking out in New Age because of a post I responded to in Magicknet. Hey, asshole, if you are going to whip out "writer's guidelines" for your projected magazine, and then get into namecalling (and you might want to learn how to handle your mailer better, so your invective lands in the right echo next time) and getting on your fucking high horse about the Middle Pillar etc. etc. when someone (and a sometime paid writer bucko) asks what the fuck you mean by positive - dimwit does not make it as a valid clarification. So what the fuck DO you mean by positive, numskull? Paul 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: JOSEPH MAX Area: MagickNet To: KAI MACTANE 13 Sep 94 09:44:00 Subject: Re: SIGILS UpdReq -=> Quoting Kai Mactane to Joseph Max <=- KM> Hey, Joe, how's it going? :) I hope you don't mind if I annotate KM> your message a bit for Mr/Ms. Lee (gotta love those cross-gender KM> names, huh?). Well, hi, Kai, how's it lie? (hehehehe...) Don't mind at all, go fer it... KM> I should start by pointing out that I have no KM> disagreement with anything Joseph Max says here , but I personally KM> use other (though similar) methods, and thought you might want a KM> different view. This matches with Max's last paragraph. ...which says the most important thing is to use a system that works for _you_. Kai's is well-thought out and logical and likely works for him very well. This just goes to show that there are _many_ variations on the themem here and no _one_ way is absolutely right for everyone. JM> Sigils are encoded representations of literal ideas -- names, images, JM> statements of desire, etc. KM> I generally think of them as words and other linear ideas KM> translated into magickal symbology. Sort of complementary definitions KM> we've got? :) No argument here. Sigils can be either/or as far as I'm concerned. JM> Many books on JM> ceremonial magic outline these methods, such as _The Golden Dawn_ by JM> Israel Regardie or _Mysteria Magica_ by Denning and Phillips. KM> I also recommend KM> _Modern_Magick:_Eleven_Lessons_in_the_High_Magickal_ _Arts_, by Donald KM> Michael Kraig. It's a very good introduction to ceremonial magick, and KM> strongly promotes the value of individual thought (as opposed to rote KM> repetition) in magick. Good point, though I use the above mentioned books more as reference books than for following blindly by rote. Especially the Golden Dawn! I once made a Lotus Wand following the GD fomula precisely and performed the entire consecration ceremony over it -- it took ALL NIGHT! You should see my diary entry afterwards: "Cnscratd....Lot.. Wand.. . . . JM> IMNSHO, it doesn't matter what method you use to derive a sigil as JM> long as you feel comfortable with it. KM> Agreed. That's why I *don't* use Spare's method: I'm not too KM> comfortable with it. :) Whereas I find it most comfortable. Different strokes for different folks. JM> Coming up JM> with the statement of desire is by far the most important part. It must JM> be short, unambiguous and to the point, and contain no "negatives" - JM> ie. "I wish to be healthy" instead of "I wish to not get sick". KM> I have also found negatives to be a good way to mess things KM> up. I have come up with what *may* be a way around it: the universal KM> "NOT" ring. You know, like in the "Ghostbusters" logo. I haven't KM> gotten a chance to try it out yet, but I theorize that, for best KM> results, it should be executed in red, regardless of the colors of the KM> rest of the working (with the probable exception of a primarily-red KM> working, where I think it should be black, but am unsure). Hmmm, very interesting -- I see no reason why it wouldn't work symbolically, and it does reflect the "changing current of the new Aeon" and all that, which I like... I'm a wee bit wary about introducing _any_ negatives into sigilization, but it sounds like it's worth doing some experimentation with. Do let us all know if you try it and how it works out. KM> ... my method only works on single words. By placing the word KM> on a talisman (which is what I usually do with these sigils), it's KM> assumed I want to bring that influence or quality into my life (if I KM> charge the talisman during the waxing moon) or banish it from my life KM> (if charged during the waning moon). If I have to get more KM> complex, I suppose I could do each word in a sentence as a different KM> sigil. You can also create seperate sigils like that, then _combine_ them into a single sigil. Examples using methods more like the one you use can be seen in _The Golden Dawn_'s chapter on planetary sigils. JM> It's best to try JM> to make it "interesting" looking, whatever that means to you. Try JM> different combos until one looks "good" to your eye. KM> I do think that's important. I also want the "feel" of the sigil KM> to match what I'm working for. Like, a love or attraction sigil (for KM> me) shouldn't have lots of sharp angles; that makes it look all spiky KM> and warlike. I tend to add little circles, crosses, arrowheads, etc. at terminal lines to give mine a "gothic" look, but not for any other reason but that it makes it look more "magickal" to me. Total artifice, but artifice is important in these things. JM> Next, you must charge the sigil magically. There are many ways of JM> doing this; performing a ritual to focus magical energy on it... KM> I use a ritual to focus magickal energy on the talisman... JM> as a "mandala" and staring at it intently during deep meditation, or by JM> using sexual magick. This is done by placing it in view and focusing on JM> it intently at the point of orgasm. KM> Interesting side note for you, Joseph: the last time I charged a KM> talisman, by the time I got through all the chanting and vibrating and KM> stuff, I felt almost as if I *had* orgasmed, though without anything KM> even approaching ejaculation. I have had this happen to me on occasion as well. Gnosis is gnosis, after all... JM> In the dollar bill charging, my JM> partner and I painted the sigil on the bill with gold ink, then made JM> love in the Tantric "sitting" position with the dollar taped to the JM> ceiling where we could both look up at it as we climaxed. KM> Another note from an experiment with that type of working about KM> four years ago: my girlfriend and I were trying to figure out where to KM> put the sigil, and finally we figured that place either of us was most KM> likely to be looking when we came was at the other one. So we painted KM> them on each others' foreheads. :) You may have noticed form a subsequent message on this thread that I recommended taping the sigils to each others foreheads! We used the "on the ceiling" trick so we could both focus on a single talisman.
KM> Actually, I think the type of ritual I do is more one that KM> connects the conscious mind, which *does* remember the desire, KM> with the subconscious. In the best rituals, the conscious mind KM> does sort of "forget" about the desire for a moment or two -- when KM> it gets too busy handling all the other stuff -- and I think those KM> moments are when the magick actually happens. But I don't make any KM> _effort_ to ferget the desire -- it just happens, naturally (probably KM> a mark of a well-done ritual! :). Ah HA! This is _exactly_ what I was trying to get across in a previous posting on the conscious/subconscious dichotomy. Damn right it's the mark of a well done, and _effective_ ritual. Of course you can't make an "effort" to forget the desire; that's as oxymoronic as telling someone to "Try to relax -- go'on, you're not TRYING HARD ENOUGH TO RELAX...!" The lore of magic is full of tricks to "inadvertantly" get the consciousness out of the way so the subconsciousness can do the Work. All of ritual work is designed to distract the conscious mind, while (if the ritual is well designed) the subliminal acrhtypes, mnemonic symbology and genetic memory corrospondences of the ritual do the _real_ magical work -- subconscious implantation. JM> After charging, one either destroys the sigil (usually by ritually JM> burning it) or uses it as a talisman (to roll it up and tie it around JM> your neck would be appropriate if it were made for protection). Our JM> dollar bill game was a variation on this. KM> Since I generally work to produce talismans, rather than sigils, KM> I hang onto them. They "magnetize" the appropriate thing into my life, KM> and *then* I burn it ritually. Variations on a theme once again. Rule of Practical Magick #1: If it works, DO IT! - J:.M:.555 ... "I wave my hands a lot, trying to convince him I'm a powerful mage." ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: JOSEPH MAX Area: MagickNet To: FIR 14 Sep 94 09:08:00 Subject: Re: SIGILS UpdReq -=> Quoting Fir to Joseph Max <=- JM> Sigils are encoded representations of literal ideas -- names, Fi> Hey Joseph! Great post. Thanks! Sank yew. The praise of a '55 Leo is high praise indeed... ... Get thee behind me Satan...and PUSH! ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Eaglestar Area: MagickNet To: All 16 Sep 94 18:02:00 Subject: MONEY MAGICK UpdReq I have been reading this conference for a while and thought I'd jump in on this subject. Money Magick! Would someone please post a spell, or ritual that they have used successfully, to gain some money? I need to get some money together soon to keep my house, I have already lost my car, and I have a tax bill coming due next month, that I don't have the money for. At this point of time, I'll try anything! So please share any spells or rituals you have. Thank You and Blessed Be <<<<<<<<<<*>>>>>>>>>>>> EagleStar <<<<<<<<<<<<*>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... By the Star-Eyed, Blessed Be! --- * 09/15/94 * 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Valkyrie Area: MagickNet To: Joseph Max 15 Sep 94 04:10:08 Subject: Sigils 1/2 UpdReq Greetings Joseph! JM>I would say that for someone who works with runes extensively could use them JM>with equal effectiveness as sigils in this manner. The similarities of JM>divising the "statement of intent" with both systems is quite striking. What JM>is of fundimental importance is that the symbols/letters have strong, JM>unambiguous meanings to the person using them. There is nothing inherently JM>"magical" about one system of writing or another; the magic resides (as JM>always) in the person using them. A statement of intent, or a clear focus on what the intended outcome will be would seem to be part of the majority of magical systems using some kind of encoding. The Norse were particularly fond of codes, and worked them into runic writings. Crytographers have worked out codes using changes in spellings and repititions in what seem to be rather mundane messages carved into markers. It seems like a natural progression to use the runes to bind a code although the earlier examples seem to be magical words or repetitions then in bind-runes. JM>As Tarot reader, I appreciate the value of numerical corrospondences. Again JM>I would say that the "deeper" meanings of the numbers (ie. the Naples JM>arrangement) must be firmly internalised by the user first before they can JM>expect magical results from using them. Numerical correspondences were primarily based on futhark placement, in effect the futharks, based on eight runes to an aett comprises a grid of sorts also. It's perhaps a coincidence that the eight square grid is also used in the counting process, and each row has an assigned number. This wouldn't have been useful until there was some standarization, and that didn't actually happen until the Viking period or later it would seem. The numbers are represented in series though, rather then being added up and/or reduced as in other numerical systems. "Is" runes: ||''''|||''''''||''''''''|||'''||''''''||' = Joseph ^^^^^^ 2:4 3:6 2:8 3:3 2:6 2:1 In _Helrunar_, Jan Fries does some work with the numerical correspondences that may have been incorporated into the Gallehus horns, which he bases on the "standard" 24-rune futhark. J O S E P H 12 22 16 19 14 9 = 92 = 11 = 2 The corresponding rune would be Uruz. JM>This is why I think bindrunes will only work well with someone who has JM>studied them and knows their meanings well - at least well enough to use JM>them for divination. Casting spells with bindrunes is sort of JM>"reverse-divination" after all, isn't it? I would agree that bindrunes would only work well for someone who knows their meanings well - at least well enough to use them for divination, and ideally, a *lot* better then that. Runes are complex associations and can vary. The bind rune should always be examined for every possible incorporated rune, something that might not be as much of a problem with other forms of creating a sigil or bind-rune. JM> Va> _The Galdrabok_, which is an Icelandic Grimoire, has a section on JM> Va> Runes and Magical signs. Stephen Flowers, who translated the copy I JM> Va> have, makes a distinction between magical signs or sigils that are JM> Va> obvious, and those that are encoded to confuse the actual meaning. You JM> Va> seem to have made the same distinction in your posting, although you JM> Va> described one that is readily "readable" in your example here. Could JM> Va> you elaborate on the difference? JM>The whole purpose of "encoding" is to prevent the conscious mind from JM>directly precieving the meaning of the sigil at the point of implanting it JM>into the subconscious. The idea is to confuse the _conscious_ mind, not the JM>subconscious. This is one area that I might disagree with the process that you are suggesting. I would use the implanting into the subconscious in some cases, but the actual writing of a runic formula, particularly if the rune is chanted or intoned at the same time is to bring the total being into integration and focus. Part of runic magic is also the scraping off or burning of runes or bind-runes when the project has been completed...that would imply a conscious awareness and evaluation at times. Flowers says that Galdur, or rune chanting/work, is analytical, conscious, willed, and ego-oriented, as being somewhat different from seidhr which uses trance, and at least involves the unconscious in the process. As a seidhkonna, I think I could basically agree with the concept that there are two approaches to the same end, one being driven or directed, and the other giving the unconscious processes a much bigger part as you have suggested. I think the intention of the process would probably determine which approach would be best. JM>I'm curious -- how did the Galdrabok draw distinctions between the two, as JM>far as their respective uses goes? Not particularly, nor did Flowers go into it in any real depth. The Galdrabok is a grimoire and is more of a "recipe" book. JM>I guess the example is pretty "readable" but that is not intended to mean JM>thay _must_ be. If I had come up with the above on the first try, I would go JM>through and simplify it a lot until it was as concise as possible. JM>For example: JM> / /^\ / JM> \/___\/ JM> /~~\|_|\ JM> /\__/| | \ JM>would be a good "concise" version of the above. I usually go through several JM>versions before I decide I like the "look and feel" of the sigil -- THAT is JM>what's most important. At this point it would also suggest other "images" begin to emerge. I think that regardless of how intellectual or conscious the process the final version should be intuitively satisfying as well...something like a poem that is technically "perfect" but also works on other levels. JM> Va> Assuming that one doesn't destroy the sigil as part of the process of JM> Va> charging and releasing, and one found that they'd made a mistake and JM> Va> the result wasn't what they intended, or another person found a sigil JM> Va> and wanted to neutralize it, what process would you suggest? JM>There are many texts that speak of "de-charging" a sigil, either in one's JM>possesion or from a distance. If the result wasn't what was intended, well, JM>then it's a bit late to lock the barn door, isn't it? This is why great care JM>MUST be taken in devising the Statement of Intent. This is true. There is the story of a rune-formula that was carved on a whale rib that were supposed to be healing, but which actually contributed to the continued illness. The solution was in scraping the runes off and recarving the correct ones. It would seem that the major concept of runic magic is the actual existance of the runes on a material plane. Runes that are "released" are usually drawn and released as sound or energy. Perhaps, if one remembered exactly what the design of the sigil was it could be recreated in reverse. That might be considered a "re-emergence" and an undoing. >>> Continued to next message * SLMR 2.1a * Runes will thou find, and rightly read... Havamal 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Valkyrie Area: MagickNet To: Joseph Max 15 Sep 94 04:10:08 Subject: Sigils 2/2 UpdReq >>> Continued from previous message JM>Since sigils can be used to carry curses, one may be faced in one's magical JM>career with having to deal with a nasty sigil delivered to oneself or a JM>friend. In sigil magic, once the sigil is destroyed, it's "work" is done. JM>Best procedure would be to burn it in the flame of a black candle, gather JM>the ashes and dispose of them in a body of water or by burial, therby JM>"grounding" the energy contained it it's material basis. If it is suspected JM>that the sigil was a curse aimed at a particular person, someone _else_ JM>other than the "target" should handle the process of grounding and disposal. Here you are using the same concept...where it is the existance of the sigil that carries the focus or is operative. Earlier you suggested burning as a way of releasing the energy to the subconscious. What if the sigil was conceived as existing on two planes and destroying it set it free. :) (Too many movies I guess...including one with a parchment that got passed all over the place and locked onto the person who burned it.) There are also examples of sigils being buried where the victim would walk over it... This seems like an area where the use of intuitive abilities would be of primary importance. JM>One might also perform a "binding" operation -- tying the sigil with black JM>cord ("Wicca") style before disposal, to bind the etheric energy it JM>contains. If one is not familiar with such operations, consult a Wiccan JM>friend or refer to a good text on the subject, such as Buckland's. Binding or containing seems like a good step to start with simply from a common sense point of view. JM>If the sigil itself is not in one's possession and it needs must be JM>discharged, then "re-create" it on a new physical basis, or strongly JM>visualise it in it's original form and proceed as above. How would you even begin to re-create something like this? Trance or some unconscious retrieval method would seem to be of particular importance. There is an example in the Eddas in the Greenlandish Lay of Atli: 4. Runes had she graven; had ravelled them Vingi-- on their bane bent was he-- ere to the brothers he gave them;... Here Vingi changes the runic message, the use of "ravelled" seems particularly appropriate. 9. Clever was Kostbera had cunning of rune signs, She conned o'er the letters by the light of the fire; tied was her tongue, though, when she tried to read them: so muddled were they she could make them out nowise. 12. "At one thing I wonder, nor can well make out; why ravelled the runes are which were written by Guthrun; for so seemed to me their secret meaning that your bane it would be if Atli's bidding ye follow: one rune she wanteth*, or 'tis the work of another." * deleted, according to Hollander. According to the account Guthrun had engraved runes on something, and in using "unraveled" in the sense it is used here it would suggest that one rune was taken out which made changed the rune structure, since it is "one rune" that is missing. The question becomes whether Guthrun left it out or if it was taken out. That would suggest that it was a bindrune which was "unbound" and lost its power to warn (protect or prevent) Gurthrun's brother. JM>That's one of the reasons I like you, Valk -- you ask such great questions! "Answer the asker till all he knows." :) Ves Heil, ~V Internet: valkyrie@eskimo.com * SLMR 2.1a * Runes will thou find, and rightly read... Havamal 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718