Knowledge and Conversation and the Four Great Princes
-
What is the position of the Estai lineage with respect to the proper time for a person who has attained K&C to summon and gain control over the "Four Great Princes and their servitors?" Is there a grade to which that work is specifically appropriate (e.g., 6=5) or is it a matter of inner guidance alone?
Also, is the "Four Great Princes" model now considered an anachronism that has been set aside in favor of a more psychological approach to dealing with the disharmonious elements within the micro and macrocosm?
-
@Khut-em-Abe said
"What is the position of the Esta lineage with respect to the proper time for a person who has attained K&C to summon and gain control over the "Four Great Princes and their servitors?" Is there a grade to which that work is specifically appropriate (e.g., 6=5) or is it a matter of inner guidance alone?"
The Soror Estai lineage takes no official position on this because the A.'.A.'. system takes no position on it.
"Also, is the "Four Great Princes" model now considered an anachronism that has been set aside in favor of a more psychological approach to dealing with the disharmonious elements within the micro and macrocosm?"
No official position. - As a general rule, the traditional magical nomenclature and (Qabalistically-reinforced) psychological language are just varying words for the same thing, so it's mostly a matter of labels and whatever understanding one is able to pull from the labels.
-
Thank you.
-
Gah! This freaks me out so much. I keep coming back to Thelema because Crowley keeps blowing my brain apart when I come to some realization and then realize OH YEAH, CROWLEY WAS ALREADY SAYING THAT or OH THAT'S WHAT BOOK OF LIES MEANS, etc. etc.
It's come to the point, as I told someone recently, that I don't "like" Crowley. He has surpassed that concept for me. I tend to read his words as if it is God himself talking to me through a man who had a pen. Just as the world is filled with so many bad things and so many good things, Crowley had 2 sides to him: one that I really like and one that I really hate. And, in the end, like his 0=2 formula, they cancel each other out and just leave the awareness of this Being.
But, then, whenever I really get back into a place where I am comfortable with everything (ie. Satan is the illusion of separation [Ayin, eye, devil], the Selfish accuser of "other' and the human ego acting as its own adversary), I come back to find something like this and I wonder then: okay, so if Satan is a real being, why again do people want to evoke him? I mean the whole Abramelin thing is like "Get thee behind me, Satan!" but, like, if Satan is basically a LIE, is this really necessary?
And if Satan is not a lie (a misperception of self-consciousness), then how am I misinterpreting everything (ie. The Great Secret, The Origin of Satan, Ayin)? Crowley at one point toyed with the idea that all of these enties were parts of the mind, which is basically the same concept found in Buddhism and, ultimately, what the Qabalah and all of Western tradition seems to be saying, too. So, this misperception of mental phenomena must be kept in a triangle for 9 months? How about controlling the 4 princes (same as the 4 aggregates of Buddhism? EDIT: woops, I guess that's 5, actually. Or the 4 elements?*) by simply following the words of Jesus in Matthew Chapter 7? I mean, that's the Law of Thelema right there, isn't it?
*what I was trying to say there is "aren't these 4 princes (and all demons) misperceptions of 'material gravity?'"
-
Awesome! Thanks for taking the time to clear up my confusion. I am laughing at myself now for thinking you meant keeping your personal Satan trapped in a triangle for 9 months. It seemed bizarre to me, but I don't know too much about demonic rituals, so I'll entertain about any notion, I guess.
I did remember that Crowley said in the Book of Lies that the devil is the critical spirit and when I read that, I realized how he is criticizing the Christian religion, which is a funny paradox. The Christian religion generally misses what Jesus was pointing to because they're too busy looking at his finger. I am not surprised Crowley's point is lost on so many people, including myself for a good decade or so because I think he respected the adversary's role in perfecting the stone and so he took glee in helping people torment themselves. I sometimes do the same thing by offering a sentence which is innocent in itself but could be interpreted wrongly if the person on the receiving end has that critical spirit. And, I figure, if that is their mental make-up, the punishment fits the crime. While I suffer their wrath as the thankless adversary; I guess in a way it is an act of sacrifice for the good cause which on the surface seems a bit "evil."
-
Ah, welcome back Fez.