HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: alt.magick,soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.german
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 12:06:01 -0400 
From: Shawn Clayton Knight <knightster+@CMU.EDU>
Subject: Black magicians (was Re: Crowley/Hitler)
  <Bss1xM.MJ8@acsu.buffalo.edu> <17krp7INN4ik@agate.berkeley.edu>
	<64894@cup.portal.com>

Tom:
 
>Personally I believe in reincarnation so I hope any black magicians 
>plotting our doom and the end of human life as we know it will fail in 
>their task ... also don't be fooled into thinking there is some secret 
>useful knowledge in "magick" that scientists don't know about 
>(scientists are very devious creatures :-) Most people I've met who
>consider themselves to be black magicians impress me as being rather 
>stupid (And California is full of such nut cases, believe me :-)

My early morning comment here is: Have you no faith?  I have attitudes
about the balance of the universe ... and I'm also firmly convinced that
scientists do NOT know all there is to know (at least, as a community;
individual scientists may be perfectly adept with magic).

>Hitler managed to mislead the German nation into following him
>down the road to destruction, so don't be too sure it can't
>happen again. If you can fool so many millions of people in
>one of the most well educated countries, no nation is safe.
>There is no more intelligent people than the Jews, yet
>Hitler's brand of evil dealt them a devastating blow.

Point one:  I have many Jewish friends and they surely have a proud
history but where do you get off saying that the Jews are the most
intelligent people on Earth?  Hitler said that about the Aryans.
Point two:  OK, yes, there is always the possibility of misleading and
deception.  But there will also always be people who (according to the
black/white division scheme) who serve the Light either magickally
and/or intellectually.  Germany had very good reasons, IMO, for being
taken by Hitler so easily.  See what World War I did to economy and
morale?  Sophomore history.

Tagi:

>Lots of people contributed to Germany's success.  Not all of them are
>'enemies'.  Love is understanding the actions of others, not condemning
>them.  There is ignorance everywhere.  Happiness does not arise from
>placing ourself above another.

Applause.  The English Prime Minister (before Churchill:  Chamberlain?) 
could be said to be a contributor to Germany's success.  No one (I've
heard) calls him an enemy.  He was trying to spread 'love' (read
'peace', 'friendship') and Germany in its ignorance (at the time; I am
not calling Germans uniformly ignorant) refused peaceful means to
prosperity.  We must all help one another rise above our ignorance, not
struggle to rise over one another.

God, this is philosophy ... :)

-shawn
From: wce@hogbbs.scol.pa.us (Bill Eichman)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: AGLA
Date: 27 Aug 92 19:42:07 GMT
Organization: The Heart of Gold BBS, Lemont PA

cranmer@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu writes:
> 
> wce@hogbbs.scol.pa.us (Bill Eichman) writes...
> 
> > I'd like to collect some input on pronunciqations for the "godname" AGLA 
> > as used in the lesser banishing.....
> 
> I hope you know it is an abbreviation ('notarikon').  The 4 letters are the
> first letters of a four word phrase.  Thus, it's not a 'real' Hebrew word,
> and has no set pronounciation.
> 
> BUT, I'm sure that Kaballah scholars have come around that particular
> difficulty with some kind of method.  Maybe one can use the 'natural' vowels
> that come after each of the 4 consonants A-G-L-A in either (1) the names of
> those letters, or (2) the words that make up the phrase.
> 
> (For casual readers that don't know much about Hebrew, 'A' is used here as
> a consonant, not a vowel.  It is a glottal stop.)
> 
> By the way, although I may have seen these somewhere, does anyone know the
> actual words that make up this particular notarikon?
> 

Well, I've seen two versions of the phrase, "Aieth Gadol Leolam Adonai", 
and "Atoh Gibor Leolam Adonai", both referring in some way to the 
"mightiness" of the "Lord".

Yes, I know it's created by notarikon, and is a non-word. Hence the 
"godname" in my question. 

This raises an interesting little question-- about the usage of this name 
in a 'basic ritual' like the LBRP. What are the symmetries of meaning in 
the pattern of 'names' YHVH, ADNI, AHIH, & AGLA?

(YHVH is another such non-word, not obviously or traditionally a 
notarikon-phrase, in this case, but not fully a 'word', either. how about 
ADNI and AHIH? What is their ancestry?)

My question still remains, however-- how could it be pronounced? If we 
treat it as a word, just as we treat ascii as a word and pronounce it 
ass-key, how _could_ it be pronounced within the various dialects?

Aah-gah-lah? Aah-gih-lah? Aah-geh-lah? Anglicized Aag-lah? Or sound it 
out letter by letter, aah-gih-lah-aah?

Thanks, Bill
From: shava@hermes.oit.unc.edu (Shava Nerad Averett)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Unicursal Hexagrams
Date: 30 Aug 92 01:22:55 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

In article <64756@cup.portal.com> Tagi@cup.portal.com (Tagi Mordred Nagashiva) writes:
>E. Averett writes:
>I agree with Tagi.  We need to add Something to the FAQ list on this, please.
>
>Ok, if it is agreed, then how does this come about?

Ummm...  I guess that's me.  I've been maintaining the FAQ (albeit not for
the past few months -- I've been on sabbatical..;) and josh has been posting
it every so often.  I'll see what I can do...

Not for the FAQ, but on the Unicursal Hexagram:

	Suspended in space, a pentacle, spinning -- now the symbol of man,
	now the symbol of the beast, tumbling, blurring into a mogen david.
	Now, the union of lingam and yoni, triangles in opposition and 
	union.  Female, and male, coupling, blurring into a spinning 69,
	opposite pentacles again.  Shapes, forces, bodies, ideas, tumbling
	in chaos.

Besides, it's easier to draw with an athame...

-- 
Shava Nerad Averett				shava_averett@unc.edu
/*  all materials (c)1992, Shava Nerad Averett, and have nothing significant
    to do with the University of North Carolina, a mostly owned subsidiary 
    of the NC Legislature, a mostly owned subsidiary of the DOT.      */
From: dgd@csd.bu.edu (David Durand)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Unicursal Hexagram AND Thoth Tarot
Date: 27 Aug 92 16:27:54 GMT
Organization: Roberstool Research Labs
In-reply-to: mesm@netcom.com's message of 27 Aug 92 09:56:51 GMT

My copy of the deck is published by Weiser, and had a copy of the
hexagram card. I always took this to be a "bonus" meditation object or
some such -- as neither the fairly bogus book in the deck -- Crowley's
show copy from the exhibition of the paintings -- nor the Book of
Thoth itself mention such an additional card.

   Crowley already did quite a bit of customization of the cards
rearranging the sequence and attributions on the basis of the book of
the Law -- but I don't think he wanted to add new cards to it.

   -- David Durand
Xref: sparky alt.magick:4131 soc.culture.german:6133 soc.culture.jewish:15032
From: cigp07@vaxa.strath.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Unicursal Hexagram AND Thoth Tarot
Date: 27 Aug 92 09:26:52 GMT
Organization: Strathclyde University VAX Cluster

In article <26AUG199222042489@zeus.tamu.edu>, spb0457@zeus.tamu.edu (SubGenius) writes:
> cranmer@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu writes...
>>Hello,
>>I think there must be a difference between either...
>>(a)  the Large and Small versions, or
>>(b)  decks sold in different countries, or something.
>>I just bought the 'small' deck a week ago in Philadelphia, PA (for about 14
>>bucks - yeesh), and there is no such card.
> 
> +--------------------------------------SubG----------------------------------+
> Pardon my drooling ignorance, but exactly what do you mean by "large" and
> "small" decks?  As in, one deck only has 95 cards and another has 61, as in
> one deck being 8x10 and another wallet size, or what?
> 
> The only Thoth Deck that I've actually used passed out of my possession
> some years ago.  The cards were slightly smaller in length and width than
> a paperback book.  The deck consisted of the usual seventy-eight cards;
> twenty-two trumps and fifty-six minor cards.  The latter was divided into
> four suits:  Wands, Cups, Swords and Discs.  Each suit consisted of four
> court cards and ten numbered cards.
> 
> No blanks, no mysterious hexagrams, no baseball trading cards.

The Thoth decks I have are both published by AG Muller of Switzerland, if
memory serves. There are two sizes. One the 'larger' size, physically larger I
add, is about the size of a paperback book. The 'small' deck is just a bit
larger than normal playing cards. Both decks have exactly the same number of
cards, including 2 additional versions of 'The Magus' and also include an
introductory booklet, excerpting bits from the Book of Thoth. Neither of these
decks have the Unicursal card in them.......

That help any?

> -SubG
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     *            	V.
                        cigp07@vaxa.strath.ac.uk
 *	 *              acarty@cs.strath.ac.uk

   *   *		"Convictions cause convicts"

What is real??                           - Principia Discordia
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:37:56 GMT

friday@netcom.com (Carol Anne Ogdin) writes:
: In <1992Aug27.195949.14122@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
: 
: >Bill
: 
: That's an allusion, Bill, to John von Neumann's remark about random
: numbers.  He said, "Anyone who believes a [digital] computer can produce
: random numbers is, of course, living in a state of sin!"

Thanks - I haven't read the work.  However, I am not sure that it changes
my statement any. It still sounds to much like "for or agin".       

Bill
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: mcmorris@vet.vet.purdue.edu (brandywine)
Subject: Re: Learning Styles & empathy
Organization: Purdue University SVM
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:19:20 GMT


I have had a few people mail me and ask what I could tell them and
teach them about building barriers to help them with the quesiton of
empathy.

I relate it to these articles simply because I found that it is very
hard for me to teach magick over the computer, where I have taught
many people how to create shields in person.  Part of it is that my
empathy is greater when I can actually feel the person.  Part of it is
that I am a *do* learner.  In magick, it is very *Very* hard for me to
learn out of a book.

about the empathy question... I would have to agree that moralizing is
useless.  However, I have such a spell and I *won't* teach it because
I don't think it is the right thing to use.  I make that choice
because *I* feel a responsibility for what *I* do.  And, in teaching
something I think will be missused, I am betraying myself.

Again, I feel the original poster was well-meaning and I simply wanted
to offer more information on the subject to persuade the poster that
what they were trying to do would *NOT*, IMO, be best accomplished
with empathy.

I am sorry if I sounded like I was moralizing... I was just using my
own ethical judgment where I think I must be responsible about my
talent (power, gift... use your own word.)

this is not meant to be a flame.

btw, I did in fact go to an eric clapton concert with no barriers...
it was hell. too much overload of emotion, no matter what emotion,
burns you out.....

just my 2 cents

-brandywine


ps if you are interested in what I can tell you about creating a
shield, email me and I will send you something.  I don't know how
much help it will be... but I will try.  AS I said, I teach best by
doing....


Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: shava@hermes.oit.unc.edu (Shava Nerad Averett)
Subject: Weird (uncle) Al (was, oddly enough, Re: Unity)
Organization: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 01:10:21 GMT

In article <Gerald_Del_Campo.008n@sorinc.UUCP> Gerald_Del_Campo@sorinc.UUCP (Gerald Del Campo) writes:
>In a message dated Tue 25 Aug 92  5:28, cward@Think.COM (Christopher)
>wrote:

[more than I really thought was necessary...;) ]

A.Crowley was a warped individual, which he happily admitted in his own 
writing.  At one point, a student of his writing sends him a letter saying
that he tried Crowley's exercise of cutting himself on the arm every time
he used a first person pronoun, with a razor.  The student was finding
the exercise interesting, but wanted Crowley to elucidate its purpose.

Crowley responded, somewhat abashedly, that he was NOT intending the exercise
to be reproduced blindly -- that it was a product of his own upbringing and
his own path that led him to that, and that another person's path required
its own prescriptions.  In this incident (can't remember the source) and in
_Confessions_, he repeatedly abdjures his own foibles on the path he took,
and throughout his writing he displays a sense of humor about his own
character flaws -- which he often demurs as such.

One should hope that in the interest of *not* forcing Uncle Al into the
christian view of sainthood, that his readers could accept his 'autohagio-
graphy' as evidence that you can be an egotistical, warped, charismatic,
socially reactive individual, and still pursue enlightenment.  He doesn't
deserve to be whitewashed -- he took a hero's path, not an ascetic's.

Thus, you are both correct.  He is warped, and it does affect his writing.
But that doesn't change the power of what he wrote.  It does change its
accessibility, but hey, ever try to read Knuth?  Kierkegaard?  Kant?
(just to sample the K's...)

-- 
Shava Nerad Averett				shava_averett@unc.edu
/*  all materials (c)1992, Shava Nerad Averett, and have nothing significant
    to do with the University of North Carolina, a mostly owned subsidiary 
    of the NC Legislature, a mostly owned subsidiary of the DOT.      */
From: jasonp@cunix4.Prime.COM (Jason R. Pascucci)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: in need of an explanation
Date: 27 Aug 92 17:52:22 GMT
Organization: Prime Computer, Inc.

The spider comes up in many works of 'mythology', and of fiction.
It's many associations, some even yeilding contradiction,
can only present one (fairly logical) question: What do
*YOU* think it means? Let your intuition be your guide. 

The example of the 'black widow' brings images of a
female-creature 'using', and the 'discarding' her mate. 
The Web is likened to the unfolding paths of the temporal universe,
and the spider is the controller. Fate was said to have a spider-form,
as Anthony picked up on in his Immortality series. 

Some spiders, being small, and yet poisonous enough
to kill a human, are indicative of a hidden danger.
Also, the (I believe) fictional Loth was a spider-goddess,
and Kali I think could assume spider form.

All these images are fairly dark, even of Fate, which 
many people even today (even though it is fairly neutral) see
as 'evil'. (Perhaps it's simply the fear of the unknown
which makes it evil.)

I find myself thinking within the bounds of racial consciousness
to evoke these images, another, perhaps, thing to let your
intuition chew over.

Another thing to think or intuit about: Do you end up killing
the spider each time? 

As you see, like many things, there may not be an explanation,
only more questions. And, even if you find an explanation
which suits, it is as equally likely to be relevant as not
(again, as many are things in this field of thought). 

Have fun. 

-- 
Jason R. Pascucci
jasonp@primerd.prime.com
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: shaman@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (David Melton)
Subject: Re: The Pentagram
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:04:56 GMT

     I think B.A.'s use of the inverted pentagram for grounding is nifty.
My wife is often confused about the 'traditional' directions used to draw
either an invoking or banishing pentagram.  I had never thought of using one
upright and one inverted.  It seems to be a natural solution to the problem.
     I wonder about the symbolic interpretation of this use though.  If the
upright pentagram represents the Will's control over the elements, would the
inverted one represent the subordination of the Will by the elements?  I'm 
inclined to think that in a banishing, the last thing you would want is to
have your Will obstructed, subordinated, or dominated.  
     One possible solution to this dilemma would be to interpret the bottom
point as the entity being banished, rather than the Will of the magus.  In
this interpretation, the elements' superior position would be appropriate.


-- 
========  
 I(  )I     David A. Melton                      
 I \/ I     shaman@mentor.cc.purdue.edu                                        
 I /\ I     Priest, Our Lady of the Hourglass Wiccan Church  
From: cal@otter.hpl.hp.com (Colin Low)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 08:04:13 GMT
Subject: Re: Shielding <was: Re: Empathic question>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK.
Newsgroups: alt.magick

B.A. Davis-Howe writes:

>
>Eddie posted three very nice visualisations for shielding.  I will give them to
>students of mine, but I will never use them myself.  Why?  Because I am
>Tactile/Kinesthetic rather than visual.  This is not a put down toward Eddie,
>but I felt it important to point out that the visual methods are not the only
>methods.  Unfortunately, they are the only ones anybody writes about.  This is
>probably partly because they are much easier to describe, but there is an
>unfortuante prejudice toward sight in books on magic.  Many of them, including
>most of the books I respect most, state categorically that the skill you *have* to learn is visualisation.  I have a friend who has called down thunderstorms
>on a number of occasions, but was unable to visualise well enough to remember
>what her lover's face looked like.  So much for the necessity of visualisation.
>
That's a good point. I began to develop a real chip on my shoulder about
visualisation until I realised I had been routinely walking around "stroking"
things with my mind and "feeling" their texture. I don't have a third eye,
I have a third hand.

>So, the next question is how can Tactile/Kinesthetic folk shield themselves?
>(I'll leave it for someone else to address Auditory-based shielding.)  Tactile/
>Kinesthetic persons perceive magical energy as sensations of heat, cold,
>pressure, movement, electrical charge, texture, resilience, etc.--all of the
>different senses of touch.  Not all T/K persons will experience things in all
>of these ways.  (I, for example, tend to be on the Kinesthetic end of the
>spectrum, rather than Tactile.)  Each person who finds that T/K is the natural
>mode for hirself should take some time to think about *how sie perceives
>energy*.  When you have done that, think about what sorts of feelings you have
>in spaces which are safe and loving, and what you perceive in spaces where you
>are not comfortable.  Also, take time to be aware of what gives you energy, 
>and how it feels when you have it.  
>
I visualise shields more or less as Eddie describes, but it isn't the
"picture" that's convincing; it's being able to "clunk" them and feel
something there. If I can get a "handle" on incoming fire, I can "bump" it
back in the direction it came from. Very touchy-feely.

A point that no-one has mentioned is that real, physical magical implements
are useful for touchy-feely folks. You get used to their feel, and of course
if you make them yourself, that adds another hundred million tactile 
impressions to the inner sensorium. You don't actually have to have them
around - I can "reach out" and "grab" my physical Shield any time I need it
because I know what it feels like. And yes Virginia, I have a physical Shield.

Colin.
From: briansp@css.itd.umich.edu (Brian Spolarich)
Subject: Re: Unicursal Hexagram AND Thoth Tarot
Organization: University of Michigan ITD Consulting and Support Services
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:32:54 GMT

In article <13516.2a9be997@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu> cranmer@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu writes:

>
>I think there must be a difference between either...
>
>(a)  the Large and Small versions, or
>(b)  decks sold in different countries, or something.
>
>I just bought the 'small' deck a week ago in Philadelphia, PA (for about 14
>bucks - yeesh), and there is no such card.

    Yeah, the larger version was seventeen dollars, and it contains
the Unicursal Hexagram card.  It also contains the blank "ghost" card
that was the subject of some chatter on alt.pagan.

 the brown man of La'ar.
From: cward@Think.COM (Christopher)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Working in Groups
Date: 27 Aug 1992 20:34:57 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: custard.think.com

In article <13522.2a9cbd78@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu>, cranmer@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu writes:
|> Thanks for the definitions.  They don't really agree with mine, but hey,
|> vive le difference, and all that.  Do you define Golden Dawn and A.'.A.'.
|> type work as 'mystical', since the progression of the 'grades' is upwards?

If you are familiar with the Tree of Life Layout, the mystical path is mapped
from Malkuth to Yesod to Tiphareth to Kether.  So, while I recall a book
by Israel Regardie on this Path (can't recall the title) his other Golden
Dawn books and the A.'.A.'. stuff I've seen follow what I term the occult
path.

The occult path uses a grade system which moves upward on the Tree along the
Path of Return: Malkuth to Yesod to Hod to Netzach to Tiphareth ...

Both Paths are "upward" but distinct.  I tend to think the occult path is
easier but longer, like taking switchbacks up a steep hill, while the mystic
path is hard but short.  I recall IR called it the Path of the Straight Arrow
or something like that. 

|> Personally, I like to think that once someone has 'worked upwards' to a
|> certain point on the Tree of Life, they are completely free to play around
|> all they want with going up, down, left, right, whatever, within that space.
|> But whether it is better alone or in groups seems irrelevant.

Certainly one is free to traverse the Tree in any manner.  The point, I think,
of a group or master scenario is that you wish directions from someone who
has travelled the Path (successfully) before.  Better yet, to accompany you
at least on your first venture.  Whether it is is better alone or in groups
is likened to travelling on a journey in a foreign land.  You can read books,
study the language, but the best/safest way is to have a knowledgable guide
along.

|> I was specifically thinking of the Golden Dawn (in all its various forms,
|> from Isis-Urania to Whare-Ra).  It's rare that an 'isolated' individual
|> will publish something of value - at least in these days of demand for new
|> New Agey books.  The Test of Time (capitals provided for humor) is half the
|> picture for me, and Mine Own Ingenium (ditto caps) is the other half.

I've browsed through the mammoth "Complete Golden Dawn System of Magic" by
I. Regardie but hesitated to buy it.  At $50 its a good deal just based on
weight but still a good deal of money to lay out.  His other books are quite
readable and shows he is a real master.  I'm just not sure how well the
Egyptian motif fits with my paradigm.

--Christopher

Xref: sparky alt.magick:4170 alt.divination:293