The Book of Thoth, HRU and invocation
-
@ Sean...a couple of suggested tweaks:
"I find that when I read the tarot, if I feel a good connection when I do the invocation to HRU, that the cards are always very clear.. however if I omit it, or if I don't feel an good connection - the cards are confused and often negative... or the divination just lacks any potency."
IMHO, the source of the lack of clarity is not the cards. The source of the lack clarity is something within you. Sounds like there's too much internal interference between your conscious mind and subconscious mind. THIS you can do something about. Relating to the cards themselves as confusing or negative etc. leaves you no access to correcting this.
"In order to be a developed magician, I would expect to competent and educated enough to have accurate information about what kinds of invocations etc I should do for tarot, so that I can correctly connect to the correct force, god (or Angel if you will), in order to get a clear divination, and yet nobody seems really interested in this and there isn't any decent books on these matters. Does anyone else relate to this or is this just me?"
That may hold some weight in theory. But in practice you would be wise to aim for an invocation is going to still you enough to be receptive to the impressions that flow from within the deeper levels of your Self. It could come from someone else or it can be something you came up with.
Go back over the notes you made in your journal and look for the entries that were "good". Look for what you did to prep, your mental and emotional state, etc. You want to be on the hunt for the different factors that added to the effectiveness of the reading. The temple must be built aright in order for the God to dwell in it. Consider that on the occasions that you had a "good connection" you build your temple aright. The question is, how did you build it? Only you have the answers to that.
-
@mark0987 said
"I must say he does only say the name HRU and Heru are the same, he does not say it is the same being.....either he didn't mean it that way, or I am just over-thinking the fact that Crowley chose his words very carefully."
Well, there's this concept interwoven into the fabric of giving letter-associations to energies. Ultimately, it is system of correspondences which enables the speaker to "enflame" their entire being with their speech. It's got a sound, a color, an emotional energy, a visual symbol.
So when you speak that name "Ah Doh Nah Ee," ideally, you're "there" fully with each letter, speaking a formula that you've flashed through your entire being.
Now... the question comes... how far back does this really go? And you have these linguists tracing the roots of words back through their etymologies, usually trying to end up with something in Sanskrit (at least with what I've seen). I guess it depends on whether you think India's mysteries originate in Egypt or vice versa or if you're just going with whatever we have left of either ancient language.
All of that to say that I don't think Crowley is suggesting that the Egyptian god "Heru" is absolutely identical with "HRU" in every way, but I think he's suggesting that "HRU" is a mystical, magical-language formula that covers a broad class of historically described divine entities (which may ultimately only be one and not specifically Egyptian), yet may actually have been expressed historically in the Egyptians' choice of a name for their god because of some kind of esoteric knowledge of an ancient magical language that we may or may not still have down perfectly.
Try it this way: This would make all specifically Egyptian "Heru" stories into universal "HRU" stories, but not all universal "HRU" stories into specifically Egyptian "Heru" stories. Well, I mean, unless you just choose to get rid of any distinction whatsoever and stop considering "Heru" as a specifically Egyptian god.
Blah, blah, blah... opinions and words. Throw away some and keep the rest. I'm trying to explain something that others know more precisely and have thought about longer. I hope the fundamental idea carries across.
-
I'm starting to remove off-topic posts on this thread. Please don't add anymore.
For one thing, the entire discussion of Heh vs. Tzaddi belongs in its own thread, not here. For another thing, trying to "give him the answer" (on analysis of the Name) is worthless, since it only matters if he gets it himself. So that's where I'm drawing the line for now.
-
@mark0987 said
"I can deal with the man's egotism and bitterness when it comes across in his writings. But don't like it when he makes a statement which contradicts a previous statement and then provides no, public, explanation for it!"
He says things in a way intended to have a particular reaction on a particular hearer at a particular stage or time. This is simply good communication technique, and also is the formula of a Hierophant. Other than on pure mechanical/practical points (like "start a pentagram at such-and-such a corner"), the answer itself doesn't matter. Rather, what matters is the impact on the one who hears it, and the alchemy set in motion by that.
"His statements on the HGA for example drive me up the wall, as do his statements on magick in general!"
The former is a fantastic example! It would be both cruel and useless to give a Neophyte the same answer you give a Zelator, or the other answer you give an Adept, or the other answer you would discuss over tea with a Magister. A particular answer in one stage's reality matrix doesn't mean the same thing it means within a different stage's reality matrix.
-
Cool with it. Just sayin'.
-
"IMHO, the source of the lack of clarity is not the cards. The source of the lack clarity is something within you. Sounds like there's too much internal interference between your conscious mind and subconscious mind. THIS you can do something about. Relating to the cards themselves as confusing or negative etc. leaves you no access to correcting this."
Hi Al-Shariyf, I agree with what you say, but there is also something that does happen with the cards in an external way, at least in so far as how I relate to it. If I invoke correctly and strongly, the cards themselves are clear. They cards fall in such a way as to be clearly understood and they speak of what I ask. If I for instance then shuffle them are then do another spread, when the connection is strong, they invariably are the exact same cards again, and I understand them. The forces act on the cards and how they fall in an external way, as well as what happens inside my mind and conscious/subconscious, through the energies that the cards invoke.
When I am in this state, the cards and myself connect harmoniously, but I've noticed that I'm not yet able to ask about any and all things. Often the cards will speak of only what they want to speak of. HRU won't reveal all that I ask, particularly when it comes to magic and other spiritual subjects. They resist certain subjects and make it plain that they won't discuss it. They don't mind speaking of mundane things but their is a resistance in other things. When I am asking of something that HRU doesn't want to answer, the subject gets changed and HRU instead speaks of the same major currents that are going on in my life. The topic gets changed so to speak. I don't feel like I'm reading the cards when this happens, but instead I feel that HRU is acting through me and we are communing.
I find that employing a signifier by selecting it by astrological degrees helps a great deal, but then it often is just that the cards will speak of that person. They won't always speak of what I ask of that person.
When the connection is not good, it seems like their are weaker forces that act on the cards. The cards are inconsistent and mercurial. They contradict themselves or they fall to extremes by telling me something is wonderful or terrible. Accompanying this is also a lack of certainty within myself. I can feel external forces that are acting upon the cards as well as myself, and they are unhelpful and deceitful. When this is the case, divination is a waste of time and I find it draining and frustrating.
I feel like I want to connect with HRU more deeply, and the traditional invocation lacks the deeper intimacy that it once had for me. I also find the lack of information on HRU frustrating, but Jim has given me some good fresh pointers that I haven't considered. It all seems to me to hinge on the invocation at least for me.
-
"Personally, I have always used HRU as a stand in for the name of my HGA, like Adonai. Of course, I could be wrong in doing so!"
Hi Greg, I am heading along the same lines but I'm full of doubt about it.
"Crowley says the following in the Book of Thoth in the Aeon card chapter-
Quote:
It should, by the way, be noted that the name Heru is identical with Hru, who is the great Angel set over the Tarot. This new Tarot may therefore be regarded as a series of illustrations to the Book of the Law; the doctrine of that Book is everywhere implicit.I personally don't like his explanation, I think it is mentioned very flippantly, for lack of a better word. Just thought it would be useful to share though!
"I've read this too, and I find it quite frustrating because it is so flippant, but of course AC does that with the questions that torment me in the middle of the night.
Is it really therefore simply that HRU is Heru? What do you say of this Jim? How would you suggest we interpret AC's comment on this?
-
"Well, there's this concept interwoven into the fabric of giving letter-associations to energies. Ultimately, it is system of correspondences which enables the speaker to "enflame" their entire being with their speech. It's got a sound, a color, an emotional energy, a visual symbol.
So when you speak that name "Ah Doh Nah Ee," ideally, you're "there" fully with each letter, speaking a formula that you've flashed through your entire being."
Being reminded of this has been very helpful to me Aion. I tend to think that I must know about HRU etc rather than use the name to know. Thank you!
-
"I must say he does only say the name HRU and Heru are the same, he does not say it is the same being.....either he didn't mean it that way, or I am just over-thinking the fact that Crowley chose his words very carefully."
My thinking exactly too Mark. AC is always very careful with his words. There's a suggestion, but only a suggestion. I try to never assume or infer.
-
Discussing this, it seems to clarify for me at least, that there really is another being concerning tarot. It doesn't seem to me to simply be a case of seeking the answers within. I don't feel that I have the answers. I don't feel that my power extends to see the true face of things past, present and future.
To me, this other is cryptically named HRU, or at least it is sometimes HRU. At other times the voice is unreliable and wishes to lead me astray. At other times it's clear or other times it refuses to answer. My point is, that it isnt me. It's not my inner voice, it's an external voice that I receive.
It doesn't feel like the Kingdom of heaven is within at all so to speak.
-
93,
"Hi Greg, I am heading along the same lines but I'm full of doubt about it."
Good, I am doubtful my name is Greg
. I am still doubtful about it, until I am given a better explanation or have a more lucid experience, I will stick to my best interpretation.Doubt is not a terrible thing! I am not going to quote the book of Lies, I am sure everyone is familiar with the chapter around here.
"Discussing this, it seems to clarify for me at least, that there really is another being concerning tarot. It doesn't seem to me to simply be a case of seeking the answers within. I don't feel that I have the answers. I don't feel that my power extends to see the true face of things past, present and future."
You talk very down about yourself sometimes. "Every man and every woman is a star", "I am the flame that burns in the heart of every man." You are a part of the body of Nuit, within you is the flame of Hadit. You are divine, why would the answers not be contained within yourself?
"It doesn't feel like the Kingdom of heaven is within at all so to speak."
I would say that Liber Legis politely disagrees, or at least, it does the way I read it!