Three Books of Occult Philosophy

>>17710464
Read modern interpretations and use the official text for reference, to ascertain original intent. Remember will is the source of magic.

>muh sekret knowledge

Occultism is just antiquated bullshit. Move on

>>17710484
t. pleb

>>17710484
ALWAYS listen to what anonymous posters on 4chan say and you'll be fine.

>>17710487
Why don't you curse me or try to remotely influence me in some way? If Magick is real that shouldn't be too difficult right?

File: 1415190412157.jpg (45KB, 495x378px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 495x378px

>>17710494
Look a Fedora Boy! And he wields the magic "Prove it" mantra!!!

>>17710484
Sounds like someone doesn't understand what I meant by "purely academic."

What are you doing in /x/ anyway?

>>17710494
You're just saying what all other uninitiated or otherwise incapable plebs say when confronted with things they aren't capable of understanding.

Living in a world of pure materialism is curse enough for you fami

>>17710502
Have tried several operations in varied magickal traditions. I have personally experienced that this shit doesn't work. Now if you claim to wield this power, why not prove it to me? I will give you any info you need that won't compromise my anonymity

>>17710473
Any good recommendations for interpretations?

I can gather most of his meaning, it's just boring as all fuck to read.

And I never expected to say that when reading about magic.

>>17710513
Dense prick thinks others owe him proof and explanations.

>>17710502
Those are fucking trilbys you moron.

>>17710519
That's a funny way of saying "my magick doesn't work".

>>17710513
>Have tried several operations in varied magickal traditions.
AKA you read about some bullshit ritual online, harbored no real knowledge about anything you were doing and inevitably failed because you put zero effort into both understanding and performing the things required to actually be able to experience the effects of whatever it was you wanted to experience.

There is no occult without understanding, that is rule number fucking one my dude, some people just can't understand it, others don't even try. Nobody owes you anything, not a wink of proof.

>>17710518

>kibalion

you dont need anyting else.

>>17710527
Well, with the occult there are just two ways: Failing while not trying very hard and failing while trying very hard.

>>17710530
>you dont need anyting else.
The Kybalion is good for laying the foundation on which to build greater knowledge but you need a lot more than that to get anywhere, it is just groundwork.

File: 3books.jpg (35KB, 514x729px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 514x729px

>>17710518

Look at as a reference book. You don't read the dictionary cover to cover do you? Interesting charts, lists of entities, assuming you got version in image with the extensive footnotes ( I've never even seen another version ) "Three Books of Occult Philosophy" by Henry Cornelius Agrippa -- Freake & Tyson version has really excellent footnotes.

He's big on sympathetic magic and days and times and magic squares -- that's what I got out of it at least.

>>17710527
Hey faggot, I have studied and experimented with Goetic evocation, sigil magick, sympathetic magic through fetish links and many, many more traditions (using such resources as Initiation into Hermetics by Franz Bardon). I have implemented these things with willpower, visualization, and in unique cases, remembering and forgetting the desired goal post ritual. Never did I experience any significant change in my reality through these methods.

>inb4 you suck at magick

Ok then, so demonstrate to me that it exists. Or you can just give me more excuses like you have been doing.

>>17710538

the key is the kibalion

doesnt matter which path you choose the kibalion is the key to understand it. ergo is the key to the power.

>>17710544

First you have to PROVE you "studied and experimented with Goetic evocation, sigil magick, sympathetic magic through fetish links and many, many more traditions (using such resources as Initiation into Hermetics by Franz Bardon)."

>>17710526
Sounds like >>17710513 was saying "my magick doesn't work," actually. Not that I'm a practitioner, so I have no place to speak.

>>17710530
>>17710538
>Kybalion
I did give that a perusal, maybe I'll get back to it. I was planning to read it after this, but I guess I can skip ahead?

>>17710532
>not knowing how to succeed without really trying
You should look into dumb luck.

>>17710541
I've always dreamed of reading the dictionary cover to cover, actually. But footnotes? Hot damn.

Sympathetic magic does interest me. Like unto like, and whatnot. Not sure how I feel about squares though.

>>17710549
When I ask for proof you give me excuses, but when I detail my experiences I'm expected to prove my understanding? You people are dense motherfuckers. Have fun playing make believe

>>17710544
Well one thing you certainly didn't master is your ego, like I said nobody owes you anything, nobody is going to show you anything, I don't care what you do or don't believe.

You should know well enough with your "experience" that the lips of wisdom are closed except for the ears of the understanding. You're shitposting then asking for the gift of knowledge in return, it's senseless.

>>17710563
Just more excuses like I expected. Just admit it, you're afraid to try anything because you know it will fail and I will be right. I know deep down you know this stupid shit doesn't work

>>17710556
The Kybalion is a good starting point, it's fairly simple, it's not cryptic, it makes further study far more easy with the Hermetic Principles fully laid out in plain text. Like the other anon said, it's a key to understanding.

>>17710583
Deep down I don't care about you, that's the honest truth, I'm not going to perform a ritual for you like some sideshow clown.

>>17710544
> Bardon
bleh

Magic is a mental art, not a physical one. even bardon starts out his book telling you he's not going to teach how to throw fireballs.You'll get altered states of mind, not altered states of physics.

>>17710527
>this is a shitpost

>>17710464
sometimes there's nothing for it but perseverance. there's been a lot of shitty writers in magic.

>>17710583
Lol you really are a fucking autist. Keep simply antagonizing and never actually trying to understand. Fucking pleb.

>>17710602
>Magic is a mental art, not a physical one.

This is why relaxation techniques, pranayama and asana are often utilized to enhance magical workings.

How the fuck is it a shitpost?

>>17710602

>as within so without

change the inner landscape get results .
mind and matter are one and the same.

>>17710613
>shitpost?

>>17710527
>bullshit ritual online
How is he supposed to tell the bullshit from actual?
> harbored no real knowledge
which knowledge is real?
>zero effort into ...
probably projection
> no occult without understanding
because there is one ultimate "way"

The whole post is one vague condescending rant devoid of any actual information. Top to bottom shitpost.

>>17710645
My bad, though you were referring to >>17710513

>>17710590
That's good.

I can follow a lot of the symbolic and cryptic stuff - sometimes - but it does get irksome. Some people like to be mystical for the sake of appearances.

Which begs the question, why bother if we've already bought your book? Just say what you have to say, don't keep fucking with us.

>>17710720
Many things in more cryptic documents can only be expressed through metaphor because human language is only built to describe things in a very limited, materialistic way. They only way to get abstract ideas across is often to use metaphor, because explaining what needs to be explained through plain text is impossible.

There are also of course lots of people out there who feel the need to shroud things in metaphor unnecessarily, but it doesn't serve anyone, it's pointless and annoying. There are a lot of poor writers out there.

>>17710602
>Magic is a mental art, not a physical one
But according to the Kybalion everything is mental so there's no difference. But it also says that we are not God -- many forget this! The greatest magic of all is the magic of the one who created all of this (whether you think the material world is an illusion or not). And hence magic is identical with nature. OP has just read Agrippa's book, so correct me if I'm wrong, but what does Agrippa call magic in that book? Natural processes. The ancient alchemists likewise stressed over and over again, that their work is merely the work of nature, that they worked with nature, not against it, and any result was only granted with God's permission with humility and prayer as prerequisites. Our little egos can't influence the creator of the universe, the great magician, more than Shakespeare's characters could influence the outcome of his plays. But if we somehow overcome our egos to such a degree that our will becomes identical with God's will, that we become mere vessels of his will, then magic is indeed possible and very real, and I think this is what Crowley meant when he said that Magick is the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in conformity with Will.

Magick is very much akin to eastern meditation as far as results go. It's one thing to say you studied, it's one thing to say you have no attachments, and it's easy to let yourself believe you've attained understanding. The reality is often you have not. There is a deep philosophical / spiritual change that occurs in you when a level has been obtained. No one can show you anything, nor should they. Many eastern masters refused to show off because it was considered a grave disrespect to whatever forces allowed them to do whatever to do so. For instance, studying something merely for the reasons of "seeing if it's bullshit" or "I know it's bullshit but let's see." Cancels out any outcome you might obtain because ultimately your attachment isn't on the work it's on the bullshit. Before you can start you have to break down and over come that wall. Shit still doesn't always work, but you have to have the mental ability to see why it might have been better that it didn't. The universe isn't someone's plaything, it's a giant mess of raw influence that occasionally does you a solid. Know how to notice that is the key.

Check out Francis Barret's The Magus, op. It's basically a compilation of Aggripas works (and others) but 'updated' (published from the start of the 19th century) and a lot easier to digest. Perhaps afterwards move on to Eliphas Levi as he was heavily influenced by The Magus, who in turn heavily influenced Aleister Crowley.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/grim/magus/

I would suggest this book, it describes Agrippa views on magic, contents of each of three books, on what sources his work was based etc. It is academic work so it should fit your interests. Pdf of it can be found easily online.

http://www.amazon.com/Language-Demons-Angels-Philosophy-Intellectual/dp/900413574X

>>17710464
>How can I better appreciate this guy's work? Should I even bother?

Maybe read him in the original?

You have to understand Agrippa in order to understand the work of men like John Dee. If you're not interested enough to stick with Agrippa, then maybe you should just move on.

>>17710879
>But according to the Kybalion everything is mental so there's no difference.

kek.

>>17711742
>Magick is very much akin to eastern meditation as far as results go.

Not really. Magick is about change. That change occurs or it doesn't.

>>17713281
>Maybe read him in the original?
>You don't know Latin? Why, I know Latin. Everyone should know Latin.

>>17713284
I think he was saying something about knowledge vs. wisdom. Like... knowing the practices, but not understanding.

File: table1.gif (20KB, 593x949px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 593x949px

>>17710464
>>17710473 >>17710502 >>17710509 >>17710511
>>17710513 >>17710518 >>17710527 >>17710532
>>17710538 >>17710541 >>17710544 >>17710548
>>17710549 >>17710563 >>17710583 >>17710590
>>17710645 >>17710855 >>17710879 >>17711742
>>17711930 >>17712279 >>17713281

ALL STOP!!! I HAVE A HISTORICAL SCHOLARLY QUESTION!!

There is a Table which accompanies Chap 74 at end of Book 1.
(PIC RELATED)

In this table, the Zodiacal, Planetary, and Elemental attributes of the Letters of the Hebrew Alphabet are significantly different than MODERN, Christian, and/or New Age Kabbalah (i.e. don't come close to the Tarot Attributes).

When did this change take place? What is the first appearance of MODERN attributes and what was the justification of the author for changing them?

Thank you...

(you can respond here and/or join the discussion at >>>/his/1137819)

>>17714724

If you're serious about this, you should make an effort to learn Latin.

>I think he was saying something about knowledge vs. wisdom. Like... knowing the practices, but not understanding

Magick either affects the intended change or it doesn't. Understanding isn't necessary. It's the tangible result that matters.

>>17715997

Agrippa is not following the Sepher Yetzirah, whereas most modern interpretations do. I don't know whether the more standardized attributions were widely known before the Golden Dawn.