LBRP
-
That I gotta try too. Thanks for reminding me!
-
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
I would like to ask something Mr Eshelman. Ypu said something about your trip to New Zealand and workings with Golden Dawn authorities there. Recently, I read in the papers based (I suppose) on Frank Salt teachings about LBRP about putting Archangel Yahu'EL (Metatron) "above" as a fifth Archangel. This is not mentioned that his name is added to "left ogf me is...etc, not that one should visuelise him. This is first time I heard about indesrting Metatron in LRP, and now I am currious is it correct and if it is how practically add this Archangel to the ritual? Any additional speach, visuelisation or something like this? Thank you in advance for possible answer, explanation or suggestion.
Love is the law, love under will.
B.
-
I have been thinking a bit about the Qabalistic Cross lately. How come Geburah comes before Gedulah and not the opposite? Did Regardie possibly reason like I do when he used this transposition in his MPR book, that the order should be the same as in the Abramelin Ritual, that the first connection should be to the light and the last to the darkness?
Is this also the reason Christians do it the other way around?
My theories are that it has to do with Macro/Micro, that the magician forms the godhead in his body by transforming Geburah to Chesed or that a magician, in order to aspire to somewhere, has to build a strong foundation from where to push off from, which I've read on this forum somewhere in another context. Am I way off the mark?
-
HPK,
If by "correct" you mean, is that part of any standard teaching - no, it isn't.
If you mean, is it symbolically correct - yes, IMHO Metatron is the appropriate archangel for the fifth Element. It takes that roll in a number of other rituals.
So my opinion (having never, to my memory, tried it this way) is that this is a worthy experiment.
PS - Somehow I missed this back in December, and just saw it now that another post was made on this thread. Sorry for taking so long to answer.
-
Is there any reason why one particular way of visualising the archangels is better than another? I'm referring here to the weapons held by the angels. Some sources say that all four angels should be visualised holding a sword and balances. Other sources sources say that each angel should be holding their respective elemental weapon. Another source claims that Raphael holds a caduceus wand, Michael holds a sword, Gabriel a chalice, and Auriel a sheaf of wheat.
Is this all just a matter of personal preference or is their some deep symbolic meaning behind these seemingly small differences that makes one visualization method better than another.
-
@Her said
"Is there any reason why one particular way of visualising the archangels is better than another? I'm referring here to the weapons held by the angels. Some sources say that all four angels should be visualised holding a sword and balances. Other sources sources say that each angel should be holding their respective elemental weapon. Another source claims that Raphael holds a caduceus wand, Michael holds a sword, Gabriel a chalice, and Auriel a sheaf of wheat."
The most general and applicable magical principle is that the archangels, who are Briatic, need to be provided a (Yetziratic) image consonant with their natures. Because the whole of their Briatic natures isn't containable within any single image, there is legitimate place for a variety of images - provided that each is, indeed, consonant with the archangel's nature.
Within the traditions which feed Temple of Thelema, certain variations of the elemental implements are advised, somewhat overlapping with what you have above. (The only problem I see with the list you have is that a Caduceus for Raphael links him with Mercury. While an angel named Raphael is the angel of Mercury, he isn't the archangel. Raphael is the name of the archangel of the Sun and Tiphereth. Sounds like maybe a bit of Mr. Gray in your reading?)
The other main magical principle that I think applies is the general differentiation between soitary and group work. In group work there is a need for everyone to be using substantially the same images (or at least images that concur in whatever are the key points) so that they don't struggle with each other and undo the work. Visualization is a creative act, and all of those in an ongoing group should create in the same way. This particular consideration doesn't apply in solitary work.
"Is this all just a matter of personal preference"
No. That implies you could have it any way you want it. In fact, it has to be authentic to the actual nature of the archangel.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"(The only problem I see with the list you have is that a Caduceus for Raphael links him with Mercury. While an angel named Raphael is the angel of Mercury, he isn't the archangel. Raphael is the name of the archangel of the Sun and Tiphereth. Sounds like maybe a bit of Mr. Gray in your reading?)"
Actually I've never read any of William Gray's books.
I believe the Raphael + Caduceus thing comes from Israel Regardie. His modern day heirs, the Cicero's, use it in all their books and claim that Regardie stressed to them the importance of not confusing the Sephirotic, Planetary, and Elemental hierarchies.
As I understand it Regardies/Cicero's use of Raphael+caduceus is meant to emphasise the Sephirotic aspect. They point out that Rapael is both a healer and teacher of the Hermetic arts as well as a mediator. All these things are associated with the sephira Tiphareth.This confuses me because I would have thought that the elemental aspect would be more appropriate. That's why I think the symbolism of the Air dagger is more fitting in the context of the pentagram ritual.
On a similar note, I've seen an Archangelic variation that uses the symbolism of the Kerubs. Michael with a Lions head, Auriel with Bulls head etc., etc. I'm not sure how valid this is though. I thought the Kerubs were lower down the hierarchy than the Archangels.
-
@Her said
"On a similar note, I've seen an Archangelic variation that uses the symbolism of the Kerubs. Michael with a Lions head, Auriel with Bulls head etc., etc. I'm not sure how valid this is though. I thought the Kerubs were lower down the hierarchy than the Archangels."
Yes, the Kerubs are the presiding powers over the Yetziratic realm - top rank of Yetzirah. And they could be used themselves for warding the quarters in various ways. But I think it would confuse things to try to fit the archangelic essences into Kerubic forms
-
Jim said, "While an angel named Raphael is the angel of Mercury, he isn't the archangel. Raphael is the name of the archangel of the Sun and Tiphereth."
I didn't know that. There are two Raphaels? Is this only in Thelema? The Archangel Raphael has a younger cousin in Yetzirah?
Thanks,
chrys333 -
@Chris Hanlon said
"Jim said, "While an angel named Raphael is the angel of Mercury, he isn't the archangel. Raphael is the name of the archangel of the Sun and Tiphereth."
I didn't know that. There are two Raphaels? Is this only in Thelema? The Archangel Raphael has a younger cousin in Yetzirah?
"No, not only in Thelema. It's a general issue in Qabalistic magick overall.
I leave as undetermined the question: Is Raphael, Archangel of Air, the same as Raphael, Archangel of Tiphereth. In practice, I treat the question as convenient in the moment.
But we do find the name Raphael - Reysh Peh Alef Lamed - used in at least three separate ways: as the Archangel of Air, the Archangel of the Sun (and, thus, of Tiphereth), and the Angel of Mercury.
We also find the name Mikhael - Meym Yod Kaf Alef Lamed - used in at least three separate ways: As the Archangel of Fire, the Archangel of Mercury (and, thus, of Hod), and the Angel of the Sun.
-
Another question about the LBRP, specifically the order of the god names. If Eheieh is the name of Kether, which is the highest and the first, and if magick should be played as safe as possible without any contamination from anything lower before the highest has been formulated, then why does the ritual begin with east and YHVH?
-
@Malaclypse said
"Another question about the LBRP, specifically the order of the god names. If Eheieh is the name of Kether, which is the highest and the first, and if magick should be played as safe as possible without any contamination from anything lower before the highest has been formulated, then why does the ritual begin with east and YHVH?"
Any Atziluthic Name is as "high" as any other. Think of them as all converging on the North Pole where there is both no geographic longitude and all geographic longitudes. Vibrating a specific sort of determines which way you're going to face in stepping off the North Pole into a particular longitude. That is, it "initializes" the chain or hierarchy of Names descending the planes along a particular line.
The ritual begins in the East because, on all parts of the globe where the Sun or any other body rises, all celestial light literally originates in the east.
As for the sequence of the names in the ritual, that's (somewhat regretably to me) one of the few Qabalistic basics that I'm under firm promise not to disclose openly. By a personal promise to the person from whom I learned it, I can't even disclose it to the First Order of Temple of Thelema. I can't even disclose it to a member of the A.'.A.'. per se. The only circumstance under which I can disclose it is to a Second Order T.'.O.'.T.'. member. (I didn't create the terms, I accepted them.) I am at liberty to say that the Names in the Lesser Ritual of the Pentagram have nothing at all to do with direction and everything whatsoever to do with sequence (as you seem to have discerned or intuited). The information isn't published anywhere per se, but, with a lot of work, can be extracted from a few core sentences in a relatively rare 13th Century Kabbalistic work, and the key is wholly persuasive.
-
Thanks for the answer, Jim! Now of course I will probably spend whatever time it takes me to solve that mystery.
-
@Malaclypse said
"Thanks for the answer, Jim! Now of course I will probably spend whatever time it takes me to solve that mystery.
"I wouldn't want or expect anything different
-
But this exact thing touches the core of why I love magick: the never ending mystery, though thanks for yet another little clue, I suppose.
It was btw sooo irresistible to say "yes, yes, I understand you can't disclose it to the A.'.A.'., but you can still tell me, right?" but it seems like bad taste to write that without the frame of a "was almost going to". -
This thread just won't die.
Going back to the very beginning of the thread and the issue of the sephira...
I just read v.I, n.1 of In the Continuum. Soror Meral, in her letter on the LBRP, reprints Crowley's "Notes on the Ritual of the Pentagram". I imagine she would've been one of those among whom this "Note" orginally circulated. In introducing it, she suggests that the Note is not actually on the LBRP, but is an instruction for a variation on or alternative to the LBRP, which she refers to as a "Thelemic Ritual of the Pentagram" (see her quote below). In this variation, you place yourself at the intersection of Samekh and Pe.
So perhaps there is no need to try to explain how, for example, both Hod and Earth could correspond to the North. Is there anything on the provenance or intent of the Note that I'm missing or misunderstanding?
@Soror Meral said
"
I am going to add some "Notes on the Ritual of the Pentagram" by Crowley, which I believe have not been published elsewhere but which had circulated in O.T.O. Lodges. I might also add that this version of the Lesser Banishing Ritual is different from that used in the Golden Dawn and by various authors. ... These "Notes" by A.C. would be useful in certain types of magical work as they ask that you imagine you are standing on the Tree whereas in the usual type of work you need to imagine that you are the Tree itself." -
@jmiller said
"So perhaps there is no need to try to explain how, for example, both Hod and Earth could correspond to the North. Is there anything on the provenance or intent of the Note that I'm missing or misunderstanding?"
Her last (quoted) sentence simply refers to the fact that there are other rituals where one finds oneself at exactly the same juncture - the intersection of Samekh and Peh on the Tree.
BTW, it isn't "Hod and Earth... to the North." It's Hod to the South - hence Mikhael.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
Her last (quoted) sentence simply refers to the fact that there are other rituals where one finds oneself at exactly the same juncture - the intersection of Samekh and Peh on the Tree."But what about the earlier sentence when she refers to "this version" and says it's different than that used by the Golden Dawn?
@Jim Eshelman said
"
BTW, it isn't "Hod and Earth... to the North." It's Hod to the South - hence Mikhael."From the "Notes":
You are facing Tiphareth (the Sun), thus on your right hand is Netzach (Venus), on your left hand Hod (Mercury), and behind you Yesod (the Moon).That should put Hod to the north, unless Tiphareth is in the west.
-
@jmiller said
"But what about the earlier sentence when she refers to "this version" and says it's different than that used by the Golden Dawn?"
I think this is just word choice. I've always understood that passage (and Soror Meral o nthe subject in general) to mean, "Now, the way Crowley tells us to do this is different from the way the Golden Dawn taught it."
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"BTW, it isn't "Hod and Earth... to the North." It's Hod to the South - hence Mikhael."From the "Notes":
You are facing Tiphareth (the Sun), thus on your right hand is Netzach (Venus), on your left hand Hod (Mercury), and behind you Yesod (the Moon)."I'm sure that's a typo in the original notes.