From: Tagi@cup.portal.com (Tagi Mordred Nagashiva)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: A little info please...
Date: Wed,  9 Sep 92 16:27:26 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <8efI4iS00VonI_ckpM@andrew.cmu.edu>

9209.09 e.v.

Kedrick Kerwin Chua writes:

(Nobody get on my case for metioning the Necronomicon: This person wants
the info, and I feel obliged to give what little help I can . . .) 


Response:

Far be it from me....  I happen to think the tome transcends our concepts
of time and space.


Kedrick:

If you are to believe anything in the good-ol' Necronomicon, then take
this literally.  


Response:

I'm told by my HGA that taking things like this literally can be very
dangerous but can yield very important things.


Kedrick:

There is a book of the N-con called the URILLIA text,
which is supposedly where Lovecraft got the name R'lyeh.  Within this
book is the information which largely discredits it, namesly the
summoning of the Ancient Ones, of which Yog-Sothoth (or IAK-SAKKAK as no
one notices him named) is supposed to be a greater part of.  Anyway, to
make a long story short, you find an OLD altar, get some OLD offerings
to the Ancient Ones, and basically just yell for them in ancient
sumerian (you don't get a choice; you either call the all or you don't
call any of them).  Then judgement day and the awakening of the serpent
follows.


Response:

There are many ways to summon the Ancient Ones, but this
is effective if one inhabits the same state of consciousness as the
Mad Arab did when he wrote the 'N-Con' (as you call it).


Kedrick:

I have never tried this personally.  See the Necronomicon for complete details.


Response:

Which version?  I've heard that there are better versions than that put
forward by 'Simon', but have yet to review them.  Can you direct me to
one or two?  If not, I'll have to contact the Mad Arab myself and write
my own copy.


Kedrick:

If I may submit a personal opinion; most of the Necronomicon is
bullsh*t.  The parts which are for real are the MAKLU text (which came
straight from the cuniform texts of Babylon) and maybe the first book
whose name I forget, which details purfication and covenance.  


Response:

On what authority do you base your assessment of this tome?  To which
version are you referring when you call it 'bullshit'?  


Kedrick:

To
repeat; the summoning of demons and "evil" spirits in this book is what
gives real magicians in the world a bad name, and again discredits the
whole of the book, which is not all bad.  But if you truly believe in
that part of the book, then that is your right.


Response:

I would note that a large percentage of today's 'expert' magicians are
concerned with the summoning of such demons/daemons/angels.  Check out
Mather's _Sacred Magick of Abramelin the Mage_ or any of Dee's Enochian
works.  Or look at the _Greater Keys of Solomon_ etc., translated by
whomever (Crowley et al).  

In your opinion what is a 'real magician'?

If you think that such summoning is what discredits this tome, then
what have you to say to those who consider this summoning to be the norm?

Apparently you have not attempted any of the rituals yourself, else you
would not say these things.  If this is the case, you would seem to be a
rather poor source of review for the book.


Kedrick:

And if you actually do summon Iak Sakkak, there is no guarantee that he
will do anything you want him to (Lovecraft describes him as a glowing
blob of discoporeal spheres; the N-Con describes him as a keeper of the
"gates", the ways between worlds).  


Response:

Yes, he would seem to be the Chaotic equivalent to Legba/Elegua or even
Ganesha.  Both of these are sometimes considered 'tricksters' and unless
one is prepared to deal with them or prove one's purity in some way,
one would be foolish to summon them.


Kedrick:

(For the edification of the other readers, please read Lovecraft's
novellette "The Dunwich Horror", which details "rituals" on old "Indian"
hills in Arkham (which doesn't exist, thank you) where Old Man Whately
summons Yog-Sothoth to do strange things.  And the Necronomicon does not
have a page 798.)


Response:

My understanding is that Lovecraft concealed via intentional blind.  He
called 'Arkham' a region of the Northeastern US.  It is quite possible
that his 'page 798' refers to pages 78-9, which would sit rather smack
dab in the middle of the book MAKLU, which you claim is authentic.

Since it has to do with ANU and the burning of 'evil spirits', I doubt
that it can be used for this, but who is to say that Lovecraft ever even
saw the N-Con?

Also, it is quite possible that there was a page 798 at one time which
has now been lost.  How do you know that this is not the case?


Kedrick:

Hope this helps.  Remember that magic is a personal experience.  If you
want to take this to a serious conclusion, follow the purification in
the first book to the letter (read it ten times before you try anything).


Response:

I don't know why one would be better off following recipes than interacting
with the Ancient Ones directly via dreams or visions and random rites.
Why do you suggest such rigidity in the face of the Chaotic Ones?

You don't sound like a Chaos Mage.  I doubt your credentials.


Thyagi
----------------------------------------------
Chaos is that which we have not consumed in our desire to know.
Newsgroups: alt.magick