Hello from the O.S.!

[Stukov]

For more info you can visit our site, though I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post to other forums yet. Please feel free to ask any questions .

As an .org we are not a commercial site and this site does not exist to promote others. Please remove references to your site unless they are being cited for a specific content relevant to a discussion.

Will be sending PM with same message to make sure it is received.

Can you just remove the thread?

The thread itself is fine, even if you are asked about a specific topic that is covered in your site, that is fine. Such as, "do you know a spell about X", then provide a link from your website that has "spell on X" already on there, thats fine. General advertisement is the no no. Does that make sense? Or do you wish me to cover it in more detail?

[OrderoftheSerpent]

The thread itself is fine, even if you are asked about a specific topic that is covered in your site, that is fine. Such as, "do you know a spell about X", then provide a link from your website that has "spell on X" already on there, thats fine. General advertisement is the no no. Does that make sense? Or do you wish me to cover it in more detail?

Nope, makes perfect sense

[darktruth77]

Hello,
I think that order of Serpent has very good points and it is agreeing with my opinions that we have to follow the dark path of self-deification and liberate ourselves from reality universe and turn ourselves from creatures into creators, and from slaves to the flow,god,fate into rulers of our own reality.
I wrote on a topichttp://www.occultforum.org/forum/viewto ... 19&t=40740 about a book https://archive.org/stream/ThomasKarlss ... k_djvu.txt that describe such things, do you agree with this book or generally with dark esoteric path and with the concept of self-deification?

[violetstar]

I wrote on a topichttp://www.occultforum.org/forum/viewto ... 19&t=40740 about a book https://archive.org/stream/ThomasKarlss ... k_djvu.txt that describe such things, do you agree with this book or generally with dark esoteric path and with the concept of self-deification?

The book you quote is full of typos and was certainly not written by an Adept with any real knowledge of Qabalah. Here is an extract that betrays the authors misunderstanding of the Tree,its components and ideologies.I will not point out the flaws and misinterpretation in this passage as those with a deeper level of understanding and even some beginners will immediately spot the errors.Throughout,the work quoted is so full of mis-conceptualised 'truths' the beginner will certainly be led into a dark realm-of confusion.

"Daath is the Sephira closest to the supernal triad consisting
of Kether. Chokmah and Binah. Chokmah is 'wisdom* and rep-
nts the associative processes of the right half of the brain,
is 'understanding and represents the analytic processes
of the left side of die brain. Daath represents "knowledge' and
is the practical synthesis of the wisdom of Chokmah and the
understanding of Binah. Daath corresponds to the throat and
the neck and to knowledge thai can be formulated and put into
practical action.

On the Tree of Life before the Fall Tiphareth is not the cen-
tral sun in the center of the Tree. There are instead two suns that
shine on the surrounding Sephiroth. The highest sun is Daath.
which represents the mystical sun that lies behind, or beyond,
the common sun. Daath is the Black Sun and Tiphareth is the
common yellow sun. Daath beams through the paths towards
Kether. Chokmah. Binah, Chesed, Ceburah and Tiphareth. This
is the upper sun that represents the 'higher world". Tiphareth
beams through the paths towards Daath. Chesed. Ceburah.
Netzach. Hod and Yesod. This is die lower sun that represents
the lower world'. The above and the below are, however, per-
fectly intertwined. The archangel Michael rules Tiphareth and
the lower sun. The archangel who is closest to Cod, namely
SamacL the bringer of light. Lucifer, rules Daath and the higher
sun."

[darktruth77]

The book has some typos because it is not the original book. I now found the original book in pdf is this https://www.docdroid.net/KbrVWL2/qabala ... -magic.pdf
But because its pages are in form of image,maybe, someone copy it and transferred it here also the pdf version its a little blur and you cant copy the words.

[Shawn Blackwolf]

You will find in here , page 97 , figure 3.7 , the Perfect Tree with Da'ath
in it's original position , above Tiphareth , before the mythology of the "Fall"...

http://www.workofthechariot.com/PDF/qabalah.pdf

[darktruth77]

You will find in here , page 97 , figure 3.7 , the Perfect Tree with Da'ath
in it's original position , above Tiphareth , before the mythology of the "Fall"...

http://www.workofthechariot.com/PDF/qabalah.pdf

I agree with some points but I can accept the god of Abraham as the one and only god above all. because he hides the truth he gets angry and he has some weaknesses.
And the one that contains everything, the monad, the truth god is not a person or being, I believe he is an impersonal god.

[Shawn Blackwolf]

You will find in here , page 97 , figure 3.7 , the Perfect Tree with Da'ath
in it's original position , above Tiphareth , before the mythology of the "Fall"...

http://www.workofthechariot.com/PDF/qabalah.pdf

I agree with some points but I can accept the god of Abraham as the one and only god above all. because he hides the truth he gets angry and he has some weaknesses.
And the one that contains everything, the monad, the truth god is not a person or being, I believe he is an impersonal god.

I only posted it for the diagrams in there...

I am not a religious person at all , nor do I follow dogma , or the idea of a ruling god , personal or impersonal...

However , if others do , that is their path...I just insist they do not push it on me...

I did know the man who wrote the book , many years ago , in our mutual town...

He later explored Eastern ways , and became an energy and martial arts teacher... [wink]

[violetstar]

You will find in here , page 97 , figure 3.7 , the Perfect Tree with Da'ath
in it's original position , above Tiphareth , before the mythology of the "Fall"...

http://www.workofthechariot.com/PDF/qabalah.pdf

I agree with some points but I can accept the god of Abraham as the one and only god above all. because he hides the truth he gets angry and he has some weaknesses.
And the one that contains everything, the monad, the truth god is not a person or being, I believe he is an impersonal god.

I only posted it for the diagrams in there...

I am not a religious person at all , nor do I follow dogma , or the idea of a ruling god , personal or impersonal...

However , if others do , that is their path...I just insist they do not push it on me...

I did know the man who wrote the book , many years ago , in our mutual town...
The book you posted is far more accurate than the Thomas Karlsson one which is full of flaws in its Qabalistic ideologies.

He later explored Eastern ways , and became an energy and martial arts teacher... [wink]

The book you link to is far more accurate than the Karlsson one.

[darktruth77]

You will find in here , page 97 , figure 3.7 , the Perfect Tree with Da'ath
in it's original position , above Tiphareth , before the mythology of the "Fall"...

http://www.workofthechariot.com/PDF/qabalah.pdf

I agree with some points but I can accept the god of Abraham as the one and only god above all. because he hides the truth he gets angry and he has some weaknesses.
And the one that contains everything, the monad, the truth god is not a person or being, I believe he is an impersonal god.

I only posted it for the diagrams in there...

I am not a religious person at all , nor do I follow dogma , or the idea of a ruling god , personal or impersonal...

However , if others do , that is their path...I just insist they do not push it on me...

I did know the man who wrote the book , many years ago , in our mutual town...

He later explored Eastern ways , and became an energy and martial arts teacher... [wink]

I dont believe to a ruler god either, an impersonal god is a god that has not desire,will etc.(everything that makes someone person)
I believe that the observer is the ruler of his reality if he realized the truth about the reality.

[OrderoftheSerpent]

I wrote on a topichttp://www.occultforum.org/forum/viewto ... 19&t=40740 about a book https://archive.org/stream/ThomasKarlss ... k_djvu.txt that describe such things, do you agree with this book or generally with dark esoteric path and with the concept of self-deification?

The book you quote is full of typos and was certainly not written by an Adept with any real knowledge of Qabalah. Here is an extract that betrays the authors misunderstanding of the Tree,its components and ideologies.I will not point out the flaws and misinterpretation in this passage as those with a deeper level of understanding and even some beginners will immediately spot the errors.Throughout,the work quoted is so full of mis-conceptualised 'truths' the beginner will certainly be led into a dark realm-of confusion.

"Daath is the Sephira closest to the supernal triad consisting
of Kether. Chokmah and Binah. Chokmah is 'wisdom* and rep-
nts the associative processes of the right half of the brain,
is 'understanding and represents the analytic processes
of the left side of die brain. Daath represents "knowledge' and
is the practical synthesis of the wisdom of Chokmah and the
understanding of Binah. Daath corresponds to the throat and
the neck and to knowledge thai can be formulated and put into
practical action.

On the Tree of Life before the Fall Tiphareth is not the cen-
tral sun in the center of the Tree. There are instead two suns that
shine on the surrounding Sephiroth. The highest sun is Daath.
which represents the mystical sun that lies behind, or beyond,
the common sun. Daath is the Black Sun and Tiphareth is the
common yellow sun. Daath beams through the paths towards
Kether. Chokmah. Binah, Chesed, Ceburah and Tiphareth. This
is the upper sun that represents the 'higher world". Tiphareth
beams through the paths towards Daath. Chesed. Ceburah.
Netzach. Hod and Yesod. This is die lower sun that represents
the lower world'. The above and the below are, however, per-
fectly intertwined. The archangel Michael rules Tiphareth and
the lower sun. The archangel who is closest to Cod, namely
SamacL the bringer of light. Lucifer, rules Daath and the higher
sun."

This is actually a pretty accurate interpretation and one used within several different groups. That you disagree with it does not somehow invalidate it. The Hermetic Hour podcast has some sick segments in Daath.

[OrderoftheSerpent]

The book you link to is far more accurate than the Karlsson one.

I did I find all on Daath and Da'ath and got 0 results, so it can't be all that accurate unless there's another spelling the author uses. You may prefer a strictly Hebrew or Hermetic tree but there's other versions out there.

[violetstar]

The book you link to is far more accurate than the Karlsson one.

I did I find all on Daath and Da'ath and got 0 results, so it can't be all that accurate unless there's another spelling the author uses. You may prefer a strictly Hebrew or Hermetic tree but there's other versions out there.

My point was that the Karlsson book is flawed.For example Daath is not a Sephiroth.Lucifer does not govern Daath and the 'Lower/upper Suns' thing is gibberish,suggesting the author had a view of Qabalah that does not concord with the views of the more Adept.

True,there are many Qabalah to choose from so if you find one that fits your theology and praxis then fine.

[OrderoftheSerpent]

My point was that the Karlsson book is flawed.For example Daath is not a Sephiroth.Lucifer does not govern Daath and the 'Lower/upper Suns' thing is gibberish,suggesting the author had a view of Qabalah that does not concord with the views of the more Adept.

True,there are many Qabalah to choose from so if you find one that fits your theology and praxis then fine.

These are all well established concepts in the greater occult world. It may not fit snuggly with whatever traditional, "white light" view of the tree you hold, but this changes nothing.

[violetstar]

My point was that the Karlsson book is flawed.For example Daath is not a Sephiroth.Lucifer does not govern Daath and the 'Lower/upper Suns' thing is gibberish,suggesting the author had a view of Qabalah that does not concord with the views of the more Adept.

True,there are many Qabalah to choose from so if you find one that fits your theology and praxis then fine.

These are all well established concepts in the greater occult world. It may not fit snuggly with whatever traditional, "white light" view of the tree you hold, but this changes nothing.

Not sure how you define the greater Occult world but the view that Daath is some kind of hidden Sephiroth is in error and not a view held by Hebrew Adepts well versed in its lore.I express their view not my own.

[violetstar]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Da%27at

https://www.themystica.com/mystica/arti ... daath.html

http://kabbalah.fayelevine.com/index.php

You probably are not convresant with this either:

While Tiferet is traditionally understood to be white, Cordovero saw it as basically green, as well as comprising the principles represented by several colours at work within this special sefirah. Thus he wrote: “They ascribed to it sapphire in extension of Da’at (Knowledge). In its revealed aspect of determination, it includes white and red, that is, the green of an egg yolk, in truth. Now Tiferet includes the colour of Chesed and Gevurah in one of two [manners]. It is either above them in the mystery of Da’at, which includes them in their roots or in its lower aspect, that is, the mixture of red and white. It also possess the colour of purple, which includes five colours. They are the mystery [of the angels] Uriel, Refael, Gavriel, Michael, and Nuriel.” [Robinson, I.: Moses Cordovero’s Introduction to Kabbalah: An Annotated Translation of His Or Ne’erav,

I did offer to share what I had...

[Shawn Blackwolf]

The book you link to is far more accurate than the Karlsson one.

I did I find all on Daath and Da'ath and got 0 results, so it can't be all that accurate unless there's another spelling the author uses. You may prefer a strictly Hebrew or Hermetic tree but there's other versions out there.

Please be more clear with what you are saying , regarding Daniel , his book , and
the relation to Da'ath / Daath...are you speaking of gematria spelling ?

Daleth - Ayin - Tau / Tav = 474 ( Obri / Hebrew )

Which , interestingly became the word : "Doth"

Further :

In the Runic comparison , via the code I work with...( see bottom attachment )

Word = 474

God = 474

( Thus "The Word Was God" )...( I am *not* religious , just a worker of gematria )

[Shawn Blackwolf]

My point was that the Karlsson book is flawed.For example Daath is not a Sephiroth.Lucifer does not govern Daath and the 'Lower/upper Suns' thing is gibberish,suggesting the author had a view of Qabalah that does not concord with the views of the more Adept.

True,there are many Qabalah to choose from so if you find one that fits your theology and praxis then fine.

These are all well established concepts in the greater occult world. It may not fit snuggly with whatever traditional, "white light" view of the tree you hold, but this changes nothing.

Not sure how you define the greater Occult world but the view that Daath is some kind of hidden Sephiroth is in error and not a view held by Hebrew Adepts well versed in its lore.I express their view not my own.

This is true , Violetstar , if , as Daniel shows , one is using the "Fallen Tree"...

Yet , if one is using what he calls the "Perfected Tree" , which was also the original
tree , before the fall , *if* one chooses to believe in a fall , as most patriarchs do ,
Da'ath *is* a Sephirah , and Malkuth does not exist...

As a Buddhist might say "all illusion"...

I am not for or against , just pointing certain things out...

There are many versions , and / or perceptions of the tree , yet some are propagated
and insisted upon as correct , more than others , due to a dominant patriarchal / rabbinical
paradigm...

[violetstar]

Just to clarify.My opinions are an expression of those held by Adept Kabbalists who base their ideologies on centuries of wisdom aided by generations of Hebrew experts.

I am an Historian not a Qabalist but I have a contact in Jerusalem who has furnished me with insights.I have already stated there are many versions and that what fits for you is fine.But as it has been explained to me how Daat was created,what it represents and its relationship to Malkut and other aspects of the Tree I will argue that it is not a Sephiroth.

[Shawn Blackwolf]

Just to clarify.My opinions are an expression of those held by Adept Kabbalists who base their ideologies on centuries of wisdom aided by generations of Hebrew experts.

I am an Historian not a Qabalist but I have a contact in Jerusalem who has furnished me with insights.I have already stated there are many versions and that what fits for you is fine.But as it has been explained to me how Daat was created,what it represents and its relationship to Malkut and other aspects of the Tree I will argue that it is not a Sephiroth.

Understood...

I have no problem , with you , or others , having their versions...

And , I accept the patriarchal viewpoint has overtaken Qabalah studies , in the world today...

Yet , I , and my normally orally based Tradition ( I am breaking tradition by teaching publicly )
a "mouth to ear" tradition , hold that our Tradition , is aeons older than the modern view
promoted that Da'ath is *not* a Sephirah...

So we may agree to disagree... [wink]

[violetstar]

Just to clarify.My opinions are an expression of those held by Adept Kabbalists who base their ideologies on centuries of wisdom aided by generations of Hebrew experts.

I am an Historian not a Qabalist but I have a contact in Jerusalem who has furnished me with insights.I have already stated there are many versions and that what fits for you is fine.But as it has been explained to me how Daat was created,what it represents and its relationship to Malkut and other aspects of the Tree I will argue that it is not a Sephiroth.

Understood...

I have no problem , with you , or others , having their versions...

And , I accept the patriarchal viewpoint has overtaken Qabalah studies , in the world today...

Yet , I , and my normally orally based Tradition ( I am breaking tradition by teaching publicly )
a "mouth to ear" tradition , hold that our Tradition , is aeons older than the modern view
promoted that Da'ath is *not* a Sephirah...

So we may agree to disagree... [wink]

The information I have comes from Qumran texts as hinted in IV Esdras xiv. 45-46.It is also drawn from the Talmud.

I do not see that as 'modern'. What evidence can you show that your tradition is aeons older?

[OrderoftheSerpent]

Just to clarify.My opinions are an expression of those held by Adept Kabbalists who base their ideologies on centuries of wisdom aided by generations of Hebrew experts.

I am an Historian not a Qabalist but I have a contact in Jerusalem who has furnished me with insights.I have already stated there are many versions and that what fits for you is fine.But as it has been explained to me how Daat was created,what it represents and its relationship to Malkut and other aspects of the Tree I will argue that it is not a Sephiroth.

And, to put it simply, there is more to the universe of Western mysticism than the Hebrew interpretation. As a historian you must know this, which indeed suggests a bias towards one system.

[violetstar]

Just to clarify.My opinions are an expression of those held by Adept Kabbalists who base their ideologies on centuries of wisdom aided by generations of Hebrew experts.

I am an Historian not a Qabalist but I have a contact in Jerusalem who has furnished me with insights.I have already stated there are many versions and that what fits for you is fine.But as it has been explained to me how Daat was created,what it represents and its relationship to Malkut and other aspects of the Tree I will argue that it is not a Sephiroth.

And, to put it simply, there is more to the universe of Western mysticism than the Hebrew interpretation. As a historian you must know this, which indeed suggests a bias towards one system.

I have no bias but simply assess what I am shown against reliable sources.

[Shawn Blackwolf]

Just to clarify.My opinions are an expression of those held by Adept Kabbalists who base their ideologies on centuries of wisdom aided by generations of Hebrew experts.

I am an Historian not a Qabalist but I have a contact in Jerusalem who has furnished me with insights.I have already stated there are many versions and that what fits for you is fine.But as it has been explained to me how Daat was created,what it represents and its relationship to Malkut and other aspects of the Tree I will argue that it is not a Sephiroth.

Understood...

I have no problem , with you , or others , having their versions...

And , I accept the patriarchal viewpoint has overtaken Qabalah studies , in the world today...

Yet , I , and my normally orally based Tradition ( I am breaking tradition by teaching publicly )
a "mouth to ear" tradition , hold that our Tradition , is aeons older than the modern view
promoted that Da'ath is *not* a Sephirah...

So we may agree to disagree... [wink]

The information I have comes from Qumran texts as hinted in IV Esdras xiv. 45-46.It is also drawn from the Talmud.

I do not see that as 'modern'. What evidence can you show that your tradition is aeons older?

Please see my bolding above...

This is what drives academics crazy...

When you have an orally based tradition , there is no evidence , nor do we care about evidence...

We care about the Tradition...

We are of the Lore...

Then there are those of the Book...

Books come afterwards , to either attempt to preserve *remnants* of Lore ,
or to try to change Lore , into their version...

It was the same with stone tablets , even in Tibet...

Remnants of Lore...not the whole tradition , nor necessarily the original one...

Just some idea of what they want others to believe...

Writing always is a poor subset of Lore... [wink]

And by gematria :

Lore = 340

Book = 340

[violetstar]

The problem with oral traditions is firstly that they become corrupted overtime and secondly they are tools one may use to invent.

You are wrong about the evidence jibe.In fact we can trace oral traditions and even chart their progress.This is achieved because the tradition however oral or secretive will often spill out and be found within local folklore,stories,songs and sometimes within other writings-such as your own reference to yours here.

If the claimed oral tradition is entirely missing from history or it features characteristics peculiar only to itself we file it under personal belief.