#occult study

The path of the initiate is a winding one. The very nature of our ascent is serpentine. It twists, turns. coils and goes back into itself. Ascension through the spheres is a gradual process. The mystic must take his time, watch his step and perform his work with devotion, or he will be consumed and annihilated by the Great Chaos. The Dragon compels us – but by degrees.

Hey, so I have this post right here that goes over why no grimoire that's worth learning from with the intent to practice it through is going to be classified as beginner/starter/etc. So I'm not going to rehash that part.

As for "getting" Agrippa, I think it's important to remember that it's an encyclopedia. As such, when you're beginning to explore grimoires, it's best to use it as a reference book. Can you use Agrippa as the foundation of your own practice? Yes, but unless you're already familiar with occult concepts and topics, it might require far more than one or two surface readings to fully digest what it's talking about.

So since it sounds like you're newer to grimtrad circles, I have a few books that I think might help build that foundation without all the dense walls of text and jargon to read through (though please bear in mind that I struggle to remember what is/not common knowledge even in mundane matters, so if some of these are a bit trickier to navigate, feel free to blame it on my incompetence):

A Deed Without A Name by Lee Morgan (staple)

Conjuring Spirits by Miller (Miller's work is v good)

The Black Arts by Richard Cavendish (read critically, don't accept everything blindly)

The Hermetic & Alchemical Writings of Paracelsus - Waite & Paracelsus (denser)

Magic, Witchcraft, and Ghosts in Greek and Roman Worlds

Elucidation of Necromancy

Celestial Intelligences by Kaminsky (denser)

Wortkunning

Some books that I worked with or through that seem easy enough to bring to real life application, with the right dedication and mindset:

The 6th & 7th Books of Moses

The Sworn Book of Honorius

The Book of Oberon

Seven Spheres & Gateways: Through Stone and Circle (1 book) & Through Light and Shadow (different book) - best combo, anyone can practice these really

Keys of Solomon & Grimorium Verum & Secrets of Solomon - solid combo

The Goetia of Dr. Rudd (a particular fave)

The Complete Mystical Records of Dr. John Dee (learn a bit of Latin first or have a solid translator on deck)

Greek Magical Papyri (PGM) & Greek and Egyptian Magical Formularies & Techniques of Greco-Egyptian Magic - best combo, imo

Orphic Hymns Grimoire & The Hekatæon & Tartaros - another good combo

The 32 Keys

Azoëtia & The Black Dragon series

Book of St. Cyprian

I think it's worth mentioning that reading more is a great way to broaden your awareness of occult concepts and topics. If you look at how things are considered across different dedicated areas of study, then you're more likely to understand the foundations of said thing. One perspective is very limiting. It's better to seek out multiple. By reading from the first list, which should give a pretty solid introductory to broad concepts, and then sifting through the grimoires mentioned, you should be able - through applying yourself properly to the task - gain an understanding of how these things may function/interact in a living tradition, and then through applying them yourself gain the practical knowledge of how they actually are.

And as a closing note: I would personally recommend leaving behind the idea that you're supposed to "get" occult books. You study from them, you learn what you can from them, and through implementing what they speak of and experimenting with what interests you, you acquire that knowledge plus your own discovered knowledge and heightened awareness. In this way, you'll come to realize why I refer to my engagement with the occult as a study and practice.

Necromancy and Veneficium – [Occult Study]

First off, hope you all had a splendid holiday season. During the break I rested for the most part and then got into studying necromancy and veneficium (the poison path), which have been personal practices for my craft and research material for my novel series. Disclaimer: The following is not medical or psychological advice. I’m not a doctor, okay? I’m just sharing some things I’ve…

The most prominent energy points within the physical-subtle body system and their connections. Based on 10 years of research and experience. This map doesn’t show all energy points, but rather all points that connect directly to the physical body.

I haven't logged anything I've learned since my last post, but here's some things I've learned on the subject.

- Sigils aren't necessarily visual symbols. You can indeed sing, or play one on a guitar or something. I was confused about this before, because I wasn't sure how you could translate a symbol to a series of notes, but the answer is that. You just, don't. They're seperate.

- The existence of hypersigils, knowledge courtesy of my favorite occultist in existence, @normal-horoscopes , which is, to put it simply, a symbol, event, or image that changes society as we know it significantly. Like 9/11, or the example CT gave, the death of Harambe. Not that the two are on equal levels, but they both changed society and culture.

- The lie that you have to forget a sigil for it to work is kind of widespread?

Currently (finally) reading Holy Heretics, and this quote in particular, as well as quite a few statements before this point, have really highlighted for me the pursuit of Chumbley & Co. and led me towards finally organizing my thoughts on certain aspects of their final products that I've mostly kept to myself hitherto.

I've read quite a few books by the Cultus Sabbati group now, as well as plenty of others such as Paracelsus and Alm, and while I'm reading Acher's work, I find myself reflecting, even without intentionally doing so, on the chthonic Greek initiation rites I had put together. Perhaps due to the non-dualistic perspective on cosmology I have, after their first draft, I started unraveling those rites and leaving almost "placeholder slots" in them where I had previously affixed Greek-specific rivers, deities, and mythological references. Now, when I'm reading this book in particular, it becomes even more obvious 1) why I was so intent on unraveling my own views on those rites and my cosmology in general (and in turn, how useful that ended up being), and 2) how Chumbley's works, and a few of his peers, appeared to crumble in their pursuit of a homogenous, one-size-fits-all-or-does-it concept.

"But now, to the best of our ability, we use symbols appropriate to the things Divine, and from these again we elevate ourselves." This sentence in particular feels like a perfect summary of where/why the Cultus' books fell short for so many I've seen attempt "decoding" them.

In the pursuit of transcending and "encoding" their work, a lot of the symbols, names, and concepts they latched onto and blended lost their ability to be used effectively in their presented form. Often, my peers would relate back to me that DBoE rites, if worked through to the letter, took many more hours than anticipated and that time seemed to just fall away and be absorbed into the working, and then when they inevitably restructured and reworded them to their needs/desires, they had an increased impact, reliable results, and took a significantly less amount of time. Truthfully, Chumbley & Co.'s works are the outer emanations of an inner, closed group, so it can, and really imo should, be argued that those extra bits and bobs and the declared so-called "ciphered" way of writing is done intentionally and that these results may in fact be what they'd intended all along. There can be a multitude of reasonings attached, but my ending note is the same:

The symbols used, in any system, must be adequate to the practitioner's understanding and relation to the divine in order to be usable in the pursuit of transcendence and unity with that which is beyond.

Cultus works just so happen to be the first that come to mind for me, especially given how quickly I have seen folks discard them entirely. A mish-mosh, rushed undertaking of DBoE will likely leave you in a room surrounded by just thoughtforms and archetypes rather than with a powerful eminence of divinity. And while this was more than likely the intended affect, it is still worth reflecting on for those like me who seek out experience with multiple different paths and systems.

It is something I have seldom verbalized, but that I carry with me when developing or seeking the understanding and knowledge necessary to undertake new ways of thinking and organizing the world around me. And, quite honestly, I think it is better put in this way than in the multitude of articles and entries I have seen that cryptically and obliquely describe Chumbley's works as "ineffectual" or "overhyped."

The Christian god is referred to as simply God, usually with different attributes before or after to further categorize or differentiate him, and I have a theory on why that is that I'm not sure Tumblr's going to like, but that I have to get off my chest.

I just need to say, before we start: I primarily wanted to put this together, not to open up like discourse or anything, but to explain and put into words more why I call and refer to this God the way I do. So if you don't agree or have a differing view on it, I think that's neat (not being sarcastic here, I genuinely enjoy hearing about how and why others think the way they do), but I really just want to put my thoughts and ideas, even in this most basic form, in order in at least this small little post. Getting the words out of my head helps free up space, and that's all I really intend this to be!

So here we go! (Note: It is like 5am, and I haven't slept so if this makes no sense or is riddled with errors, please do be patient with me!)

Cavendish puts the basis, or really the jumping point, of my theory well when he explains the importance that a name carries in magic:

"The conviction that the name of a thing contains the essence of its being is one of the oldest and most fundamental of magical beliefs. Names are used to identify things. Instead of reciting a long and detailed description of the characteristics of an animal, it is more convenient to say, this is a 'frog'. . . . For the magical thinker the name sums up all the characteristics which make the animal what it is, and so the name is the animal's identity. If it did not have this name but some other - 'toad' perhaps - it would not be what it is, but something different. This is the root of the magical theory that the name of a thing is a miniature image if it, which can be used as a substitute for the thing itself."

- The Black Arts (1967) Richard Cavendish, p41

When you think of it, King Solomon's control over the 72 demons was heavily reliant on knowing not only the name of the demons, and those of some of their underlings, but also on speaking the "true names of God." We're not going to talk about the whole Hebrew inclusion or background to the workings done, because this post is primarily going to be about names and domination rather than specific systems such as that. But! In knowing the true names of God and speaking them during the conjurations, the magician gains domination over the demons and the right to call on angels for their assistance in their work. (Is it 100% guaranteed? Lol absolutely not. But it is something to be said that calling on His true names can be almost like a bargain chip or incentive. Hey, I know this, and I'm waving it like a VIP backstage pass; please let me in, guys! That's sort of the vibe/energy of it.)

Regardless, the demons called upon recognize the power in the names used and, in recognizing it, heed the call of the magician who pronounces and knows them too. Their fear is based on the efficacy and authenticity of those names.

Back to the Nameless God. What does this mean for him?

It is my opinion that denying his name to the masses was on purpose. If he is an all-knowing, all-seeing entity then he had to have known and been aware of what giving out his name would mean. That's not to say humans are capable of dominating deities on the whole or on average, but it is a wellknown practice to eat your gods, consume your idols, etc. And in some traditions and religions, it is your duty to put your gods on trial.

But I'm not saying he's a coward, but I'm not not saying it, ya know? The Fae know it and the demons know it all alike. Give up your name and you give up power. A loss of control? For the big man? Even in the bible, it wasn't something he was overly fond of.

But anyways, it makes sense, in my mind, to refer to him as the Nameless God - even if I do happen to have the Solomonic texts and the grimoires phonetically spelling out his holy names and such. It's kind of a . . . tip of the hat, really. An "I see you and I respect it" kind of thing.