what does /x/ think about hermeticism? I think its a pretty interesting

>>18993097
Invaluable to the western esoteric tradition

>>18993097
Better than Gnosticism, anti-life fucks.

Hermeticism is the foundation of Wester Mystery. If you don't like Hermetics, gtfo.

Course, Hermeticism is Luciferianism, which is the TRVE CVLT.

Whether you're a gnostic hermeticist or a pagan hermeticist really depends on how much you're getting fucked.

>>18993363
>Hermeticism is Luciferianism
Care to cite that from Corpus Hermeticum or the Chaldean Oracles, or other similar Hermetic work?

>>18993369
Care you google Archytypes?
Course I know youre anti-perennial.
Read anyone from Hall to Blavatsky, they're Luciferian, admit it over and over.

We argued about Pythagorean Elements and YHVH correspondences last I was here Ape. You know I know my stuff.

>>18993394
Obviously you do not. Also, being well versed in one topic of limited scope does not make you well versed in others by association. But I'm not Ape.

>>18993394
>Care you google Archytypes?
Yeah, I've read a lot of Jung. He's on the bookshelf.

>>18993394
>You know I know my stuff.
K.
Enjoy your thread.
You fight that Jewish menace, I'm sure they're the reason why life sucks.

>>18993396
How's this, not all Hermeticists are Luciferians, but most notable high level western adepts are Sun Worshipers who base their practice in Hermeticism.

>>18993397
If you think I worship Wotan, youre mistaken. I dipped my toes in that current briefly, the higher ups ask way to much. Theyll kill me off with the rest if they gain a foothold in any case.

>>18993432
Sun veneration =\= Luciferianism

>>18993441
^This.

~t. sun worshiper & lumiel worshiper who can keep their praxes compartmentalized.

>>>also the accepted correlation of Sol in the Hermetic Kabbalah is Satan proper rather than Lucifer, given that the gateway from Hod to Tifaret is The Devil, Ayin, or 70.

>>18993394
You lost credit at Blavatsky.

>>18993097
I'm really into it and what >>18993361
said.

>>18993441
True, not in all cases, but look at the Western Adepts, what to you come away with.

Except the Wotanist/Ariosophists or the Neopagans, they have a very different Sun Worship for sure, very anti-Luciferian in some cases.

>>18993453
Blavatsky? Shes a little Indo for my taste, but she externalized the hierarchy quite well. Atlantis and Lemuria excluded of course.

>>18993453
Yeah, it's almost like we've advanced our knowledge base almost two hundred years since her time.

>>18993473
Modernism is always correct.
Btw, love hermeticism.

>>18993484
>Modernism is always correct.
Did I say that?
What about building a knowledge base implies an epistemological and ontological outlook a little less than a hundred years past it's sell-by date?

>>18993491
There's more than four elements, Pythagoras was so fucking dumb.

File: born-to-think-world-is-absurd-suicide-em-all-1942-4510735.png (112KB, 500x561px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 500x561px

>>18993496
???

>>18993500
Ooh I can't wait for the incoming display

>>18993500
I say Blavatsky.
You say, like geez she's so old now.
I say fuck Pythagoras.
You Camus post.

File: 14963348.jpg (18KB, 315x310px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 315x310px

>>18993508
And yet, nobody here appears to be capable of quoting the Corpus Hermeticum but me, even in an age of google and multiple free online Hermetic libraries.

>>18993508
Your observation skills are phenomenal. Except
>making huge advancements since =\= she's so old. In fact, she is dead!

>spawned western magic(k)
>spawned the scientific method
It's pretty awesome.

>>18993514
I've read Copenhavers translation. Read Goodrick-Clarke, Haangraff, Fairvre, most notable occultists as well.

I can quote you Hermetic texts, but I think basing it in the maps is weaker than speaking of the territory.

>>18993561
Oh shit he pulled out the map-territory relationship ! Alfred Habdank Skarbek Korzybsk and Robert Anton Wilson eat your heart out!

>>18993515
Yes, I am aware she is dead.

>>18993571
That's right folks, I've done at least a cursory reading. My truism are the truist

File: tmp_25158-799-1836971265.gif (1MB, 736x627px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 736x627px

>>18993496
If you're referring to the atomic elements, technically none of those are atoms. You may take this moment to quit while you are ahead, and just appreciatiate the pretty colors in life.

>>18993605
I was referring to classical elements, jackass.

>>18993616
We're still waiting for your response to>>18993500

>>18993619
Answered it here
>>18993508

>>18993627
I do not see anything about the elements in your post.

>>18993631
They were saying Blavatsky was wrong and old thus worthless for occultism. I replied by saying Pythagoras was not right about reality being based on the four classical elements.

What are you not getting?
You're very dense for someone who talks condescendingly.

File: tmp_25158-3c7b4fb7bbf40ae8512de444a228d690-1373958351.jpg (81KB, 564x741px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 564x741px

>>18993616
I think we're done here.

If you want to try counting all the elements again from the ground up, please feel free to do so.

>>18993643
>thus worthless for occultism
Where exactly did I say that, again?
Or did you just assume that's how I felt, despite the selected HPB I keep on the bookshelf? Incidentally it's nestled against a friend's anthology on mythical archetypes.

>>18993644
Are you a Wicca?
Google it, there were four classical elements, not five, spirit was added later.

At least look at Wikipedia, are you this lazy, gullible and condescending?

>>18993649
It was stated that I lost credit by referencing Blavatsky here >>18993453

You concurred here >>18993473

So I assumed you discounted her. If that's not the case, thats fine too.

File: IMG_4169.jpg (276KB, 770x599px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 770x599px

>>18993097
Intriguing Op. going to read up on the Emerald tablet, etc.

>>18993693
Read the Corpus Hermeticum. The emerald tablet is a much later text.

>>18993706
Thank you. Will do. Nobody wins, here.

>>18993097
Mirrors, mirrors on the all.

Ape or someone else, want to give me a rundown on Hermeticism (IN REAL WORDS NOT INTENTIONALLY VAGUE MUMBO JUMBO HOLY SHIT). I already know part of it involves achieving a purity of soul, but why? What deities are venerated? What's their take on cosmology and creation? Polytheistic or no?

>>18993500
Wood,Metal, Spirit, Soul, Quientessencse, I thought you knew your stuff

>>18993746
>purity of soul, but why
Roughly the same as why other philosophies seek enlightenment, to be at peace and understand one's own purpose in life.

>deities venerated
All or none, depending on how you look at it.

>cosmology and creation
tl;dr there was the ALL, then the all divided itself into all things.

>polytheistic or no
Yes and no. Different subdivisions of the ALL could be though of as "deities", but they're all part of the ALL. It's similar to Hinduism in that regard.

>>18993746
Hermetism is a very heterogeneous school of thought that arose in Alexandria around the first centuries AD. There's several types of hermetism (pagan, christian, jewish, etc) but the one you're probably thinking of is the christian-pagan one, the one that everyone was masturbating over during the Renaissance.
The two main texts are the Asclepius (a dialogue between Asclepius and Hermes) and the Emerald Table.
The endgame is to attain godhood, aka unite with the godhead aka obtain the philosopher's stone. In most neoplatonic schools of thought (hermetism owes a lot to neoplatonism) the idea is that there's a trascendental god, there's the material world, and there's 7 spheres or archons in the middle which act as guards/demons. To attain unity with the godhead, you purify yourself/go through a process of initiations until you pass through those 7 gates and that's it, you've become a very holy motherfucker.

>>18993775
Im interested in the polytheistic side of things. Do some worship the classical Greco-Roman deities, as avatars of the One god?

>>18993667
don't worry about it, they'll never acknowledge when they make a mistake, they don't like being wrong and will never say sorry, you now your right and they can never take that away from you.
See how they haven't replied?
No apology because your rightand they are wrong
The arrogance of some folk here.

>>18993773
>Wood,Metal
I'm sorry, I didn't realize middle Daoist elemental schemes were relevant to Classical Greek theo-philosophy.

>Spirit, Soul
This gets into the underlying implication of Physis but suffice to say that Plato thought these two were outside of the elemental schema due to their primordial nature.
>see Plato's Laws, Book 10(892c)

>quintessence
This term appears no earlier than like 1400 or so.

>>18993808
Except it was already answered before the anon even made that.

>>18993746
Sorry, forgot to answer the questions
>involves achieving a purity of soul, but why?
because you want to be a perfect motherfucker
>What deities are venerated?
It's not a religion, it's more like a philosophy. For hermeticism there's only one transcendental source/god/father, the name of whom is not really important because he's all. Then you have the 7 archons/spheres, which are not really worshipped.And then you have sage figures, like Asclepius or Hermes.
>What's their take on cosmology and creation? >Polytheistic or no?
Eh, Hermetism is way too heterogeneous a creed to truly answer that. A very rough creation story would be something like the gnostics have; at first there was the one, the one saw his reflection and from it emanated the self-created, and from the self-created came the first thought (sophia/barbelo in gnosticism). Everything was well until the first thought got a little carried away with her adoration and gave birth to the demiurge, who created material reality and the 7 spheres.
As for whether it's polytheistic or not, I'd say that it's def polytheistic because you still can have other gods of the material world, and worship them, within this philosophy. This doesn't takeaway from the idea that there's one trascendental god beyond everything.

>>18993811
The orginal poster doesn't specify what tradition, just mentions pythagores or whowever
You were just acting like a fifth elemtn is so wow, unuseua lwhen even a slight look around would have revealed other stuff they could have been describing but its not as if you don't go for the easiest/laziest hack response is it?

>>18993823
Read the anon againandyou ll see it wasnt

>>18993804
I'm no expert, so you'd probably want to get a second opinion on this from a more experienced scholar, but I don't think there's any conflict with worshiping whatever god or gods you want along with studying the Hermetic path. The avatar of the One God / ALL doesn't really show up in Hermetic texts due to the way ALL is defined. i.e., the ALL literally can't have an avatar or it wouldn't be ALL.
Any personified god being worshiped would contain a part of the ALL, but wouldn't be all of the ALL.

File: 4fHs8mq.jpg (49KB, 480x456px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 480x456px

>>18993834
>pythagores or whowever

File: comforting-a-grammar-nazi.jpg (48KB, 497x516px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 497x516px

>>18993846
No reply to the rest of it,just pick on the spelling, good foryou.
Just like you to run from the argument/discussion eh old friend

>>18993804
You probably want Neoplatonism.
Much of what dude replied with here >>18993844 pairs better with late early/middle Neoplatonic though than it does with Hermetica writ large (though it is applicable) particularly w/r/t Plotinus' ONE.

It's fucking based.

>>18993858
What's book are you reading lately Ape?

>>18993746

the neophyte must be self-initiated

>>18993969
well if there isn't anyone else around to initiate them then yeah sure

>>18993746
Literally just read the Corpus Hermeticism. If you spent half as much time with the source text as you have bitching here, you would already have your answer.

File: 1480005655955.jpg (62KB, 308x378px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 308x378px

>>18993746
SpoonFeed Me!!!!!
Casue Ima helpless Babby!!!!!

>>18993514
Copying a bro get a link to free libraries

>>18993980

I mean read the fuckin book

>>18994000
Not him, not intrested in hermiticism just commenting,sorry I gotyou riledup mate
chill pill mate

xxx

>>18994005

it's cool, I'm sorry for being an arsehole. It's just annoying when people want brief summaries of things that by default can't be summarised briefly.

>>18994018
Its ok we aren't fighting. I agree it can be annoying especially when they want centuries of thoughts and concepts in one line of writing.

>>18994018
Hermeticism:

Basis of Western esotericism along with Neoplatonism, Gnosticism, Qabalah, and Alchemy.

Main thesis is that we live in a flawed reality based on the higher states of being. Either through a cosmic mishap or a divine volition, man became incarnate in the material realm.

Transmutation of souls
Mind over matter
Spiritual purification

As above so below.

There's a gist.

>>18994034
Recommended reading for Hermeticism?

>>18994057
Copenhavers hermetica

Emerald tablet

Western Esoteric Traditions by Goodrick-Clarke

That'll make you more knowledgeable than most.

>>18994034
I hope you're not implying that alchemy is only spiritual.

>>18994091
Eh, I don't really care

>>18994128
Whatever you say. But everyone who pretends to have a smattering of Hermetic knowledge should know that "As above so bellow means" naturally implies practical Alchemy as well as spiritual. And everyone should know that their favorite alchemists from the antiquity to the Reneissance and up until the 19th century are all PROVEN to have done practical work. That's it from me.

File: 1485112138949.jpg (164KB, 678x960px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 678x960px

>>18994057
The Kybalion>Economic books>Economic History Books>History knowledge>physics books>stellar man>Repeat for 3 years.

File: DivinationHarryRon.jpg (40KB, 640x417px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 640x417px

>>18996215
>Economics
Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuugh

Bardonian Hermetism is best Hermetism.
Literally is the best of the best of Western occultism.
I will never shill Franz Bardon enough as much as it is good stuff.

>>18997267
"Initiation into Hermetics" is not even Hermeticism. Nor is it initiatory. But Ok.

>>18996686
>I'm too stupid to get it, therefore it is magic and guesswork

/x/ in a nutshell

>>18997273
It is not initiatory for you because you failed the initiation.
It is Hermetism, why are you saying the contrary?

>>18997295
Nope. "Teach you stuff" =/= "initiation". He literally wasn't even an initiate. If you think that's Hermetic, read Corpus Hermeticum and get back to me.

>>18996686
Understanding economics is great for understanding hermetics , its a great gate to understand hermetics in a human level both outside of one in human societies and inside.

>>18997298
Isn't it like that just because corpus was written in older times and they are explaining shit in a very archaic way? If you read in beetween the lines doesn't it make same points as bardon?

>>18997714
This
Before the practice were concealed behind deep philosophical texts.
Bardon was an initiate. Telling otherwise is denial of a great magician.

>>18997284
>>18997635
I just hate economics, is all.

>>18998412
Ok what Order was he an initiate of? What was his grade in whatever system he was initiated into before he died? Hell, look up his biography yourself. He was a fat LARPer with some vaguely implementable, unoriginal ideas.

>>18998412
Literally, read the Hermetic Corpus, then come talk. It's not like it's written in fucking cipher

>>18993658
>At least look at Wikipedia
>gullible

oy vay kek

File: 1481324293432.png (97KB, 345x314px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 345x314px

>>18999013
You dont need too much just basic understanding , the reason i put economics and history is because its hard to learn hermetics without human society examples.
The kybalion is like a compass , its like a new operative system for your brain , but without knowledge of other things like economics , history and physics , its like a compass without stars and nowhere to aim.

>>18999230
>The kybalion is like a compass
I still, for the life of me, will never understand why people pass off non Hermetic texts as Hermetic orthodoxy.

>>18999247
The kybalion is an interesting attempt at a syncretic system and you should treat it as such.

>>18999257
>you should treat it as such
I'll treat it however I goddamn well please thanks.

>>18993746
It is all an elaborate theatrics. A rabbit hole devoid of dead ends. It's not supposed to be that difficult to understand. Take yourself as example. Did you think and worry that hard to come into this world? I'm sure you know the answer to that.

>>18999018
>>18999105
You know nothing about Bardon it seems as much as your errors are blatant.
Go read all of his stuff, and then we can talk too.
The Hermetic Corpus or the Emerald Tablets are not really practice oriented, for most it stays on the line of philosophy.
Bardon created a practical curriculum in addition of theory, and it is one of the best if not the best in the West, so that's why it is so good.

>>18999766
>You know nothing about Bardon it seems as much as your errors are blatant.
So if we're ignorant, enlighten us.
Under which tradition did he receive Initiation? What is the initiation method in his texts? How does it relate to the CH?

>Emerald Tablets
>plural
The Emerald Tablet is fourteen sentences.

>and it is one of the best if not the best in the West
Compared to...what? Thelema? Golden Dawn? SRIA? Eleusis? Gnostic cults? Trad craft?

Because I think you'll find Bardon rather lacking in comprehensiveness or historicity of the aforementioned systems.

>>18999269
This. Also nice 8D

>>18999784
>>18999766
Alright, I guess I'll ask specific questions then:

If Bardon's system is so comprehensive, how come he accounts for 20 less Tattvas than the Golden Dawn, which is 11 less than the tantric systems the Tattvas come from?

If his system is comprehensive why does he offer no single mechanism of initiation in the entirety of his texts?

If it's the best, why has the community at large rejected Bardon's tarot revisions while embracing Crowley's?

Why does he have no contemporary school of magick and mysticism, and offers no lineal chain to his system?

>>18999784
>So if we're ignorant, enlighten us.
Just go read it all, not just IIH.
Also, know that as much most people need to be initiated, a few are prodigies that does not need that.
Bardon was one of them.
There is a whole story behind his story which is along the lines of willed incarnation, just like the Dalai Lama does.
Sometimes a great soul incarnates consciously to help people and all indications led it to be the case for Bardon.
Just read all the books, and eventually practice (because true understanding comes from practice right).

>>18999844
>Just go read it all, not just IIH.
I have. Bardon answers exactly zero of my queries.

>Bardon was one of them.
You're gonna have to substantiate the he was a "prodigy" in light of >>18999819

>just like the Dalai Lama does
Bardon claims to be Hermes himself but I see little evidence of this actually being the case.

>Just read all the books
I reiterate that I have and have found is program to be seriously wanting in contrast to other practical systems.

>>18999819
>If Bardon's system is so comprehensive, how come he accounts for 20 less Tattvas than the Golden Dawn, which is 11 less than the tantric systems the Tattvas come from?

Bardon teaches the first three leafs of the book of wisdom, the tarots if one may say but he does it wholly (especially the first one).
If the mastery of even just the first one was that easy, all people that claim to study the next ones on other systems would already be literal living gods, is that what you would call Crowley lol?

>If his system is comprehensive why does he offer no single mechanism of initiation in the entirety of his texts?
Initiation comes from you, there is no miracle pill, so he just gives you the homework to initiate yourself. If you failed on your own, it isn't a reason to call his work a failure in terms of initiation.

>If it's the best, why has the community at large rejected Bardon's tarot revisions while embracing Crowley's?
You have the vocal occultist bullshiters, and then the silent magicians doing their work. The truth does not always come from the vocal majority.

>Why does he have no contemporary school of magick and mysticism, and offers no lineal chain to his system?
The aim of the path he provided is to be able to work on your own alone.
The goal never was to create a group of posers to get some meaningless public recognition.
There are some Bardonian Hermetism student groups here & there though but they are often not public.

>>18999858
>Bardon claims to be Hermes himself but I see little evidence of this actually being the case.
He never claimed that. Pretty funny you think that though haha. Now I am supposed to think you read all the books?

>I reiterate that I have and have found is program to be seriously wanting in contrast to other practical systems.
Well in the end, only practice can answer your questions.
If you never advanced into the practical steps of Bardon curriculum, you are limited to understand it through your flawed intellect.

>>18999932
>Bardon teaches the first three leafs of the book of wisdom
And literally nobody but Bardon and the people who lean on him use his interpretations, while the Thoth deck has caused a permutation shift in about half the extant decks in the Tzaddi/Pe switch.

>Initiation comes from you
I don't disagree but do reject that Bardon brings it.

>he just gives you the homework
Not at all.
He doesn't even offer a self initiation.
Any self initiation constructed on his assertions are going to be wildly incorrect.

>If you failed on your own
My Ordeals have been severe.

>The aim of the path he provided is to be able to work on your own alone.
Dozens of systems offer this.
Now, explain WHY his is BETTER than the others.

So, like, here's an example of his deficiency: He posits three planes of operation. He claims to be an expert on Kabbalah.

If this is the case and he's an expert, why the fuck did he leave off two whole planes of operation?

>>18999946
According to the website that bears his name and ends in a com: "Franz Bardon's spirit has been perfected over thousands of years. Before incarnating as Franz Bardon, he had incarnated as Hermes Trismegistus, Lao Tzu, Nostradamus, Robert Fludd, Count St. Germain, and Apollonius of Tyana."

>only practice can answer your questions
My practice indicates that Bardon is garbage.

>you are limited to understand it through your flawed intellect.
Yes, my ability to find greater worth in other systems means my intellect is deficient.

>>18999819

>If Bardon's system is so comprehensive, how come he accounts for 20 less Tattvas than the Golden Dawn, which is 11 less than the tantric systems the Tattvas come from?

Mere semantics, the specifics of such things varying massively between Buddhist traditions. Some Buddhist traditions speak of essentially opposing viewpoints as object truth, the same is true of all religions; the entire system is filled with the views culminated over countless generations. By what means does one proclaim the traditional Tibetan ideas "true", any moreso than other ideas? One need not practice the Tibetan yogas of dream and sleep in order to lucid dream; though the goal of that system is essentially to induce lucidity in the dream state. Does this make it any more or less true? Doubtful.

>If his system is comprehensive why does he offer no single mechanism of initiation in the entirety of his texts?

Perhaps because initiation itself is an ultimately worthless endeavor steeped in traditional hierarchical cult practices? Or because a plethora of information already existed from hundreds of schools of thought which may serve the same purpose of initiation, e.g. self-realization and heightened awareness/understanding of reality? Regardless, I'm sure you've read Bardon well enough to understand that all of the material necessary for any such initiation procedure is already included in the text (which is more of a theoretical manual than anything else), the process of ritual magic in general being well enough described that the practitioner can engage in whatever self-initiation he or she deems acceptable. The presence or absence of an initiation rite does not make or break a system or school of thought.

>>18999978
>Buddhist traditions
Try Kashmiri Saivism and the Uttara Kaula Trika.

In Buddhism the Tattvas are sublimated into Dharma theory, and the Skandhas are much more theoretical/phenomenological than the substances of the Tattvas in the Saivist doctrines.

>Regardless, I'm sure you've read Bardon well enough to understand that all of the material necessary for any such initiation procedure is already included in the text
I'd strongly disagree with this when comparing the initiatory scripts of serious magickal orders against Bardon.

>The presence or absence of an initiation rite does not make or break a system or school of thought.
It sure fucking does when it claims to be a manual of initiation into Hermetica.

>>18999958
>He doesn't even offer a self initiation.
I think you forgot to read the practical parts.

>According to the website that bears his name and ends in a com: "Franz Bardon's spirit has been perfected over thousands of years. Before incarnating as Franz Bardon, he had incarnated as Hermes Trismegistus, Lao Tzu, Nostradamus, Robert Fludd, Count St. Germain, and Apollonius of Tyana."
That's a website, not the books from 70years ago.
If you believe faithfully everything on the internet, the misconceptions will never end.

>Yes, my ability to find greater worth in other systems means my intellect is deficient.
I'm just saying some things can't be understood using intellect only.

Well anyway, in the end I can only advise you to read Bardon's books again.
If you still think it is bad, then no problem, you are free to think that.
Well let's end it here, the discussion will go nowhere from this point.

On a side note, why are you tripcoding? Do you have a need for recognition?

>>18999819
>If it's the best, why has the community at large rejected Bardon's tarot revisions while embracing Crowley's?

Come now, my friend, let not your biases shine through here. We all know that Waite's rendition is far more well known, accepted, and used as the basis of far more iconography associated with the tarot than Crowley's. But even if it were the case that Crowley's system is most accepted, of what value would that be? Justin Beiber's music was very popular for a time, very well accepted among the general population. Does that make it good? By the Force, no!
Also, please provide for me the basis by which something can be considered the "best". Magick is highly subjective. A system which works perfectly for you, which you have mastered all theoretical knowledge regarding, may still be ineffective for others. Some have no success with Goetia even after years of effort and others have visual affirmation of their work on the first try. Is the lemegeton the "best" grimoire because it works so well for some? Or the "worst" because it has no effects for others?

>Why does he have no contemporary school of magick and mysticism, and offers no lineal chain to his system?

And herein lies my problem with the entire occult community. So much emphasis on lineage, it's sickening! Criticize Bardon's work directly, fine, go ahead and do that! But egads, Thoth, what does it matter if there is a lineage? There are many true words unaccepted by the masses which hold no lineage. There are many falsities which are steeped in tradition and have clear lineage, and often are mistaken for the truth. Of what value is lineage?

>>18999978
Aaaaaaaaaaaaah since the beginning when "TheApeOf..." was talking about an initiation rite (ritualistic cultist type of initiation) when he referenced to initiation?
Hahahahahahahaha smells like the cult slave.
No wonder he praises Crowley but shits on Bardon.

>>19000015
>We all know that Waite's rendition is far more well known, accepted, and used
I mean, the Thoth configuration is being imported by GD outfits wholesale, and the Thoth is the most used deck I've ever seen, I'd say Crowley's the immanent authority on the topic of Tarot (other than like mebbe Jodorowsky). Which reminds me I need to do an early Lurianic ToL layout.

>it's sickening
I'm sorry traditions of trained and competent operatives triggers you.

>Criticize Bardon's work directly
I have, loudly and often.

>what does it matter if there is a lineage
It matters because anyone under Bardon's assumptions is in for a RUDE awakening when approaching more serious systems, even the ones Bardon claims to be an "expert" on.

It's like one of those Christfags with a PhD from a degree mill claiming to be an expert on molecular evolutionary bio.

>>19000015
>And herein lies my problem with the entire occult community. So much emphasis on lineage, it's sickening!
Some good common sense right there. I like that.
Most occult people crave to pose as an edgy cult/lineage member, that's totally laughable.
I suppose we can call it an insecurity.

>>19000049
Y'know this wouldn't be a topic of my critique if it weren't for:
>>19000029
>It matters because anyone under Bardon's assumptions is in for a RUDE awakening when approaching more serious systems, even the ones Bardon claims to be an "expert" on.
>It's like one of those Christfags with a PhD from a degree mill claiming to be an expert on molecular evolutionary bio.

Notice how I don't jump on teachers and orgs that ADMIT their ahistoricity and/or manufactured tradition?

>>19000029

>Thoth tarot
That all may be true, but I'm guessing it's mostly regional. Most readers in my area use either the Rider-Waite deck or variations based on it. It's very popular among the psychic fairs and such around my town, and I rarely see the Thoth deck in use.
Which is a shame. Thoth is a well designed deck, and I'd like to see at LEAST one local reader using it from time to time.

>traditions of trained and competent operatives
But there are many traditions by trained and competent operatives which suggest literally opposite things to be true. The Chinese numerological system, for example, is simply a different system than what you see come out of something like Kabbalah, and those systems suggest ultimately contradictory things.

There is only one solution to this. Practice each system yourself and discover the truth through your own practice in the occult science. But if that is ultimately the means by which one can discover what is the truth most high, and indeed the actualization of the great work, then why pay heed to one system over another? Why does popularity have anything to do with it?

>>19000060
>Manufactured tradition

Hermes Trismegistus may not have even been a real person, Thoth. It could be said that literally everything claiming to be genuine hermeticism may be a manufactured tradition in this way. Do you disagree?

File: Franz_Bardon.jpg (47KB, 384x491px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 384x491px

>>19000029
>I'd say Crowley's the immanent authority
Crowley is a clown, as is the golden dawn, an as much are the ritual addicts cultists among the occult diaspora.

>>19000064
>rarely see the Thoth deck in use
Huh.

Where I am I get this weird phenomena where people who HATE Crowley break down for a Thoth deck because:
>it werks

>those systems suggest ultimately contradictory things
...like?
Since when did we expect cultures to be in agreement? Moreover, what, exactly, is contradictory. I find running hidden hexes and transforms to be rather in conformity with practices like Iyyun.

>discover the truth through your own practice in the occult science
I should have to repeat what my findings about Bardon were, as a practical guide or theoretical expert.

>>19000071
>Do you disagree?
Yuh. Sure do. We see it growing out of Near East contacts and Neoplatonism with a dash of Christfaggotry. So what if he was real? "Hermes who is Thoth" is reason enough for me to construe the Hermetic corpus as any other Tantrik dialogue between Shiva and Shakti. Moreover, there are successive chains of elaboration that Bardon appears to break against with little/no justification outside of his own idiosyncrasies.

>>19000072
>72
How come you cats never actually attempt a derascination of Crowley's system in favor of just name calling?

>>19000029
>traditions of trained and competent operatives
You can be a professional bullshiter. That's how politicians form political parties and get their jobs you know.

>>19000102
>How come you cats never actually attempt a derascination of Crowley's system in favor of just name calling?
Why so sensible?
I just do what Crowley said himself!
Here is the quote of him:
>"May the New Year bring you courage to break your resolutions early! My own plan is to swear off every kind of virtue, so that I triumph even when I fall!”"

>>19000081
>I should have to repeat what my findings about Bardon were, as a practical guide or theoretical expert.
A lot of person claims the great value of Bardon system.
But yeah it is probably not the majority opinion, just as is the popularity of classical music in comparison to modern commercial music nowadays.

>>19000143
>Bardon's like classical music and the source texts and their modern inheritors are Katy Perry.
Zozzle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJiKVy0VNQk

>>19000102
>>19000081

>...like?
Well, Abramelin rejects numerology and astrology outright. There are various systems of astrology in particular with different associations for planets, including temporal associations (and thereby numerology), and different numbers of planets and such, etc. you know all of that already.

>Since when did we expect cultures to be in agreement?
That's exactly my point, though. These cultures are not in agreement, yet each of them has their own effects, and the mystical experience and magick have been done using these various systems effectively. Which suggests to me that a search for a "genuine" or "objective" system is a fool's errand.

>So what if he was real?
It is a claim made by the texts. Reject this one claim, and you must create a standard by which you accept and reject claims from a single text in order to avoid intellectual dishonesty. Otherwise, why accept ANY of the claims? Why study the hidden knowledge at all? At this point, I have no idea what your methods for discerning truth from lies in these manuscripts are. And you have surely read many (I've seen your work), and by sheer numbers I doubt you've practiced every spell in every book, tested every idea in every manuscript directly, etc.

So by what means do you discern truth from falsehood?

>Crowley's system
Crowley's work represents a failed attempt at gnostic theurgy. He ended up using the occult as a means by which he could live out a hedonistic life, and I respect him for understanding the world well enough to do so. I have no doubt that Crowley had glimpses of the Force, but he went out of his way to make his writing obscure and reinforce hierarchical concepts which have their foundation in the Golden Dawn-esque "fraternity" approach to magick and in various historical cults, and this arguably stands in the way of helping others to attain realization, defeating the purpose of writing such books in the first place. His poetry, though, is magnificent.

>>19000166
>failed attempt at gnostic theurgy
What?
Explain to me, in detail, how he fails by like the standards of Iamblichus.

>He ended up using the occult as a means by which he could live out a hedonistic life
muh dejenirasee

>he went out of his way to make his writing obscure
Or you're not used to turn of the century diction?

>Abramelin rejects numerology and astrology outright
I'm wondering what Abramelin has to do with a contemplative system like Iyyun especially if we're talking pure Hebrew systems and not late ritual syncretism.

>reinforce hierarchical concepts
A.'.A.'. is a decentralized guru/chela affair. Ideally. Beggar/king in Liber L. Redaction of grades to Lover, Hermit, and Man/Woman of Earth.

>His poetry, though, is magnificent.
His poetry is, largely, trash.

>>19000181
When I say Crowley failed at creating gnostic theurgy, it may not be exoterically acceptable as a claim. But in my view (having myself been, admittedly, more influenced by Jung than the ancients) the entire presentation of Thelema goes against the fundamental principle of nondualistic enterprise. The liber(s) themselves are a good enough example of this, but instead look at Crowley's ritual work. He implanted many symbols, especially colors, which may or may not be effective (as effective as any form of chaos magick) but which do heavily suggest a strong reinforcement of worldly attachment within his own psychology and which is thereby present within his system. Furthermore, adherence to general hierarchical systems, in regard to the formal structure of various grades and initiation rites, but also with regards to metaphysical claims regarding otherworldly entities, suggests deficiency in his complete self-realization and liberation. Also blatant in his writings is his own narcissism and self-inflated ego, which don't particularly come off (to me, at least) as the inspired, enlightened thoughts of a self-realized and liberated individual.

>Poetry
You really don't like the poetry of super magus master Crowley, who hath mastered English in all its forms (or so he himself claims)? Well, I'll admit he's no Bukowski, but I'd put him above your typical American schlock. At the very least it's entertaining, which is more than can be said of many revered poets.
Like Bukowski said, doesn't matter what you die of if you write boring shit.

>>19000211
>Thelema goes against the fundamental principle of nondualistic enterprise
W-what?

There's no differentiation above Da'ath.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1GBrr7nB3U

>>19000226

Yes, hence my surprise that you stand so harshly against Bardon. In essence, Crowley did to nondualism what Bardon did to hermeticism: he presented a half-baked system which reflects what he says it does in name alone and rarely makes any accurate points. It can be very valuable, I'm sure, but Crowley wasn't enlightened and his system is not the product of an enlightened person.

>>19000242
So you said Bardon did a half baked work, then what is the best hermetic curriculum out there? Tell me please.

File: lol.gif (1005KB, 280x141px) Image search: [Google]

1005KB, 280x141px

>>18999819
>the community

This thread is great. Bump for Hermes.

>>19000478
that depends how fresh the concepts are for you. history is littered with hermeticrack. finding it is not hard, maintaining equilibrium can be.

>>18993097
I really like it. A lot of it reminds me of the Buddha's teachings.

Does anyone know the relationship between Hermeticism and the Kaballah?

>>19000935
atum-ra

>>19000945
Cool bro...very interesting. What about this God though? Does he have something to do with "the All"?

I love you people

>>19000991
thx I love you too

>>19000930
I really like Bardon shit but go ahead hit me with you favorite hermetics books.

>>19001184
Mead's Corpus Hermeticum.

>>19001140
<3