Larvae
-
In the early writings of Dion Fortune and even Blavatsky there is a lot on the subject of Larvae or shells of the dead. They are supposed to be dense etheric detritus left after the death of an individual and are attracted by blood and people that gives out to much energy from their nephesh.
For those with greater experience in the subject, how common these beings really are?
Are they such a nasty problem as Fortune and Blavatsky thought? -
You're speaking of the Q'lippoth, a Hebrew word that means "husks, shells" etc.
They're quite common, though not encountered so much as the residue of actual dead people. They are often embodied as what appear to be autonomous or semi-autonomous beings, and as such have been catalogued by Qabbalists.
Their most commonly encountered forms are persisting rigidified ideas, both in the collective and the individual form. For example, think of outgrown ideas that persist (seeming to have a life of their own), most of what get lumped under the headings of reactive patterns and "complexes," etc. Some of them are species-wide, and some of them are just your own old shit.
-
They slowly drain your energy, and are often unnoticed. When you do find one latched to you, it may suddenly dawn on you how tender the bite location is.
As you begin to pull on them to remove them, the pain can be quite intense. But when it is finally detached, the relief is palpable, and nearly instantaneous.
(I'm elaborating on JAE's description)
Sent from my phone
-
@Jim Eshelman said
" They are often embodied as what appear to be autonomous or semi-autonomous beings, and as such have been catalogued by Qabbalists. "
Is there any indication that these beings once were part of the natural hierarchy of the tree or they are more like detritus? In other words, can a Kerubin fall and start living at Gamaliel?
@Jim Eshelman said
"Their most commonly encountered forms are persisting rigidified ideas, both in the collective and the individual form. For example, think of outgrown ideas that persist (seeming to have a life of their own), most of what get lumped under the headings of reactive patterns and "complexes," etc. Some of them are species-wide, and some of them are just your own old (****)."
Thanks, it is quite helpful to understand them in a psychological perspective. Curiously I know of cases where a complex appeared in active imagination in a form very similar to some classic descriptions of Q'lippoth. Kind of scary.
Who would imagine that I could end up seeing my own (***) flying around?
-
@Mephis said
"To add to this, Eliphaz Levi also mentions them a great deal in his works; in French the word is "larves." This comes from the Latin "larva," meaning "ghost" or "evil spirit.""
Good old Eliphas. I actually had him in mind when writing this question. He has some interesting remarks about the relationship of these shells and necromantic practices. Very relevant to a magician living in necromantic country.
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"They slowly drain your energy, and are often unnoticed. When you do find one latched to you, it may suddenly dawn on you how tender the bite location is."
It seems that the very practice of banishing has this effect of putting pressure on them. Easier to see the enemy if he is choking on poisonous gas.