My Thoughts on Grimoires

[C505]

Dove's blood ink originally used real doves blood, scholars believe John Dee's cipher contained codes because he was an English spy relaying info for the Queen. I enjoy all information and points of view but it hasn't refuted my original complaints.

[Desecrated]

Dove's blood ink originally used real doves blood,

I've not been able to find anything that supports that. The oldest sources I've found are about ruby powder, and then people thought it was dove's blood.
That is why I made the distinction between the two texts.

scholars believe John Dee's cipher contained codes because he was an English spy relaying info for the Queen.

Yes and no, yes he was a spy, yes he wrote in cipher about spy information, but also wrote in cipher about mathematics and so on, because there is a long tradition about protecting your knowledge.

I enjoy all information and points of view but it hasn't refuted my original complaints.

You said there was no fool's trap, people have demonstrated several fool's traps, if you still choose to not believe that you either have your own definition of reality or you're not listening.

[Desecrated]

Not so.I argue that these terms have been misinterpreted by those who were ignorant of the text they read from.Look at Desecrateds posts above for examples that prove you are in error.

You make the mistake of assuming that I am talking about things I've read from books, instead of something that I've held in my hands. I am a practitioner. I do things. I have stood in a graveyard, spoken to its spirits, and held the earth of the dead in my hands. I do not need a book to tell me that there is power in a graveyard. I know from experience that there is.

Alas, if you do not practice in a way that connects you to the world around you, then my words will likely mean little to you.



~:Shin:~

Soooo, we should basically just believe you because your delusions told you so

[Shinichi]

Soooo, we should basically just believe you because your delusions told you so

There is plenty of historical reference to practices that work with the dead, and plenty of living traditions that still do. You should know that quite well. However, my point was there is a difference between reading something from a book and experiencing through practice why it was written, seeing for yourself what value it actually has. I do not take anything in any book at face value, no matter how antiquated or coded it is or isn't, because book knowledge is useless without practical work. A well educated scholar is not the same thing as a practicing initiate.



~:Shin:~

[violetstar]

The information regarding Vervain I gave has no academic source I know of.However,firstly there are allusions to its connection with death in The History and Practice of Magic by Christian Pitois and in Dictionary of Plant Lore by D.C.Watts where it use is stated as part of the construction of a Hand of Glory.

Oral tradition of older witchcraft practices indicate the plants use in Necromantic graveyard rites as a protection device and to constrain spirits.My own private research into a group practising Necromancy also indicates Vervain was a blind for graveyard dirt.The leader of that group certainly practised what he preached and made no idle unverified claims.

[C505]

Dove's blood ink originally used real doves blood,

I've not been able to find anything that supports that. The oldest sources I've found are about ruby powder, and then people thought it was dove's blood.
That is why I made the distinction between the two texts.

scholars believe John Dee's cipher contained codes because he was an English spy relaying info for the Queen.

Yes and no, yes he was a spy, yes he wrote in cipher about spy information, but also wrote in cipher about mathematics and so on, because there is a long tradition about protecting your knowledge.

I enjoy all information and points of view but it hasn't refuted my original complaints.

You said there was no fool's trap, people have demonstrated several fool's traps, if you still choose to not believe that you either have your own definition of reality or you're not listening.

On doves blood http://www.luckymojo.com/dovesblood.html

People have demonstrated folk names for herbs etc, but still claim secret initiation to have the secrets without proof

[Desecrated]

Soooo, we should basically just believe you because your delusions told you so

There is plenty of historical reference to practices that work with the dead, and plenty of living traditions that still do. You should know that quite well. However, my point was there is a difference between reading something from a book and experiencing through practice why it was written, seeing for yourself what value it actually has. I do not take anything in any book at face value, no matter how antiquated or coded it is or isn't, because book knowledge is useless without practical work. A well educated scholar is not the same thing as a practicing initiate.



~:Shin:~

But this is a discussion about books.... SO it would make more sense to use a book as a source, instead of using your own experience as a source.
What you are talking about is Sympathetic magic and you could have said the golden chain of homer or agrippa, and your argument would have hold more water.

[Desecrated]

The information regarding Vervain I gave has no academic source I know of.However,firstly there are allusions to its connection with death in The History and Practice of Magic by Christian Pitois and in Dictionary of Plant Lore by D.C.Watts where it use is stated as part of the construction of a Hand of Glory.

Oral tradition of older witchcraft practices indicate the plants use in Necromantic graveyard rites as a protection device and to constrain spirits.My own private research into a group practising Necromancy also indicates Vervain was a blind for graveyard dirt.The leader of that group certainly practised what he preached and made no idle unverified claims.

Paul christian or christian pitois wrote that book in 1870. That is 1900 years later than Virgil. But you have some interesting use of Verbena in Pliny the elder. It's about 100 years later that Virgil, but it gives some weight to your argument.

Your own private research into an unnamed group is not a very strong argument. Your basically making the same argument as shin here. It's your experience against his experience. That's some pretty shaky foundation to start a discussion on.

But, as I said, It's interesting, and I will look into it further.

[Desecrated]

On doves blood http://www.luckymojo.com/dovesblood.html

People have demonstrated folk names for herbs etc, but still claim secret initiation to have the secrets without proof

Catherine yronwoode is not a great source for historical accuracy.
The greek did not use wild animals in a sacrificial maters. so when greek and roman sources call for dovesblood ink, they are talking about ruby stones. The color of ruby is described as dove's blood or pigeon blood red.
Max Bauer precious stones and pliny the elder confirms this.

About greek sacrifice:

"In Greek, sacrifice was a much more specific thing: it means killing a tame animal and offering part of it to the gods, or to one specific god, while eating the rest of it yourself.

The Greeks probably began to sacrifice animals to their gods not long after they first began to keep tame animals. It was one thing to hunt and kill wild animals like deer, or fish, but it bothered people to kill animals they had taken care of, that trusted them. (And it still bothers many people today.)
Greek sacrifice
Athenian red-figure vase, 430-425 BC (now in the Louvre)

So people began to kill tame (domestic) animals only when they thought a god wanted them to do it. And only all in a group, all together, sharing the guilt." K.E.Carr

---

Doves and birds ARE however used in jewish tradition. It's mention several times in the old testament and even in the new testament. So the sixth and seventh book of moses that builds upon jewish sources is actually talking about a real dove.
And the 6th & 7th book of moses is well known in hoodoo so that is where Cat is getting her information. But it is important to remember that the moses books are 18th century fakes written in germany before getting published in new york and sold by the new york hindu mysterious store in 1880.

Here is an actual photo to back that claim:

[Desecrated]

I'll dig up some quotes about actual initiation and why some information was protected, and why these authors used fools trap.
But I have to go and lay some flooring today.

[violetstar]

About greek sacrifice:

"In Greek, sacrifice was a much more specific thing: it means killing a tame animal and offering part of it to the gods, or to one specific god, while eating the rest of it yourself.

The Greeks probably began to sacrifice animals to their gods not long after they first began to keep tame animals. It was one thing to hunt and kill wild animals like deer, or fish, but it bothered people to kill animals they had taken care of, that trusted them. (And it still bothers many people today.)
Greek sacrifice
Athenian red-figure vase, 430-425 BC (now in the Louvre)

So people began to kill tame (domestic) animals only when they thought a god wanted them to do it. And only all in a group, all together, sharing the guilt." K.E.Carr

In fact it was far more specific than that.Greek apotropaeic rituals also used human beings as well as animals.There was a big difference between sacrificial rites and the apotropaeic expulsion rituals which you refer to.In fact they are the reverse of each other.

The apotropaeic paradigm involved five stages:Selection,Consecration,Investiture,Transference and Expulsion.This was a Community rite using a substitute(Pharmakos)to take away sin from an endangered group.The sacrificial rite did not employ any substitute for the Community nor did it bear their defilement,curses or sin.The victim here was a pure undefiled offering.Your source does not make this clear.
The Athenian vase may have been misinterpreted as the animal involved was almost always a goat.Your source mistakes the writings of Aristophanes where he offers bulls,or cows instead of a human pharmakos and concludes that both were used which was true but only during Festivals in Athens.

Here is an account of human sacrifice given by Hellodios third century CE and preserved in Photius:

It was thecustom at Athens to lead in procession two pharmakoi with a view to purification,one for the men one for the women.The pharkos for the men had black figs round his neck,the other had white ones,and he(Helladios)says they were called Subachoi.This purification was the nature of an apotropaeic ceremony to avert pestilential diseases and it took its rise from Androglos the Cretan,when at Athens the Athenians suffered abnormally from a pestilential disease,the custom was observed of constantly purifying the city by pharmakoi
- Text 5

[C505]

On doves blood http://www.luckymojo.com/dovesblood.html

People have demonstrated folk names for herbs etc, but still claim secret initiation to have the secrets without proof

Catherine yronwoode is not a great source for historical accuracy.
The greek did not use wild animals in a sacrificial maters. so when greek and roman sources call for dovesblood ink, they are talking about ruby stones. The color of ruby is described as dove's blood or pigeon blood red.
Max Bauer precious stones and pliny the elder confirms this.

About greek sacrifice:


"In Greek, sacrifice was a much more specific thing: it means killing a tame animal and offering part of it to the gods, or to one specific god, while eating the rest of it yourself.

The Greeks probably began to sacrifice animals to their gods not long after they first began to keep tame animals. It was one thing to hunt and kill wild animals like deer, or fish, but it bothered people to kill animals they had taken care of, that trusted them. (And it still bothers many people today.)
Greek sacrifice
Athenian red-figure vase, 430-425 BC (now in the Louvre)

So people began to kill tame (domestic) animals only when they thought a god wanted them to do it. And only all in a group, all together, sharing the guilt." K.E.Carr

---

Doves and birds ARE however used in jewish tradition. It's mention several times in the old testament and even in the new testament. So the sixth and seventh book of moses that builds upon jewish sources is actually talking about a real dove.
And the 6th & 7th book of moses is well known in hoodoo so that is where Cat is getting her information. But it is important to remember that the moses books are 18th century fakes written in germany before getting
published in new york and sold by the new york hindu mysterious store in 1880.

Here is an actual photo to back that claim:

On a side note any idea where I could get some of those books in the photo? Don't mean to get off topic

[Desecrated]

On a side note any idea where I could get some of those books in the photo? Don't mean to get off topic

Some are reprinted by modern companies, but some of them are only available online as pdf.

You can find a good amount of old books on ebay and similar sites.

If you are in the usa getting in contact with wierus, Berkelouw or Weiser Antiquarian Books is a good idea.
Peter Harrington London UK is a nice shop for europeans.

[Shinichi]

But this is a discussion about books.... SO it would make more sense to use a book as a source, instead of using your own experience as a source.
What you are talking about is Sympathetic magic and you could have said the golden chain of homer or agrippa, and your argument would have hold more water.

Sympathetic Magic is part of what I was talking about, though a lot of that relies less on occult virtues and more on other things. The other part is the nature of Occult Virtue itself. How do we know that different things have different properties? What are Occult Virtues? Made-up psychological associations? Energies passed down from the planets because certain plants and stones have somewhat similar energies as certain planets?

They are certainly more than a list of attributes written in a book. My point is that they are things that you can feel and see and work with directly. Paracelsus tried to describe how it works by talking about the Archeus. It's been called the Anima Mundi, and numerous other things. Regardless, it is vital for an initiate to be able to work with them directly, regardless of whether you're doing Alchemy or Low Magick or other things. If you only follow the recipes in books, you'll never be able to make your own formulas, or be able to substitute the things in old formulas that you can't quite get access to. Vervain prepared in a certain way can be used as a substitute for graveyard dirt, for example, something far more relevant to this discussion than simply saying that graveyard dirt is a blind. Quartz is a common substitute for diamonds, too, though I've known low quality quartz to shatter under ritual pressures meant for diamonds, and similar mishaps occur every so often. Substitution is a tricky business.

Perhaps I am the odd one in the discussion, but I certainly do feel that personal experience and magical practice are more important than book knowledge, even as important as an educational foundation is. You know I love my books too, Desecrated, but grimoires in particular aren't very useful if you don't know how to use them.



~:Shin:~

[Amavisso]

A lot of grimoires are omitting various important parts of the same rites, so one need to read a lot of them to get a full picture. It doesn't help that people made mistakes while copying grimoires, in result we have incomplete books with totally messed up information.

As an example I can point at Heptameron and Liber Juratus Honorii. You can compare the two and find a lot of discrepancies. Liber Juratus doesn't have such HUGE mistakes as Heptameron does, but it has a lot of small errors, mistypes in names and such...

Another example is Tetragrammaton, which seems to be its own ritual element, which is omitted in all medieval grimoires.

What concerns fool traps: it is always easier to take what you have at hand rather than go and actually do some ritual preparations (so-called "full traps"). I don't think that substituting 40-days long ritual with 5-minutes work will produce equal result.

Picatrix is different story. It exists in several versions, all of which have big discrepancies in what concerns planetary correspondences and such. Personally, I am trying to tie together Jyotish and Cabbalistic correspondences together (e. g., Saturn is of Earth Element according to Cabbala, but is of Air Element according to Jyotish texts).

[Desecrated]

Perhaps I am the odd one in the discussion, but I certainly do feel that personal experience and magical practice are more important than book knowledge,

Jet planes travels faster than pigeons.

That is a great fucking fact, but it doesn't fit in an argument about cars.

[Desecrated]

Before this goes completely out of hand, let us remind ourself of what the topic is:

C505 said: . "No such thing as "fool traps" to hide the secrets from the uninitiated"

Here is the complete section from the picatrix:

"Chapter Four: The ancient sage who who have spoken of the occult sciences and magic in their books wrote them as obscure as they cold, so that no one would be able to gain any benefit from them, except by means of wisdom and continual study and practice in them. This chapter is placed here, as though by mistake, in order to make a modest demonstration of this."

So let's break it down.

Premise 1: No trap in old books
Premise 2: There also is no evidence of fool traps ever brought forth other than claims from modern day practitioners.
Conclusion: There should be no mention of this in old books.

Counter argument
The quote above from a 13th century text disproves both premise 1 and 2. Therefore conclusion is false.

DONE. END.

[chowderpope]

[C505]

Before this goes completely out of hand, let us remind ourself of what the topic is:

C505 said: . "No such thing as "fool traps" to hide the secrets from the uninitiated"

Here is the complete section from the picatrix:

"Chapter Four: The ancient sage who who have spoken of the occult sciences and magic in their books wrote them as obscure as they cold, so that no one would be able to gain any benefit from them, except by means of wisdom and continual study and practice in them. This chapter is placed here, as though by mistake, in order to make a modest demonstration of this."

So let's break it down.

Premise 1: No trap in old books
Premise 2: There also is no evidence of fool traps ever brought forth other than claims from modern day practitioners.
Conclusion: There should be no mention of this in old books.

Counter argument
The quote above from a 13th century text disproves both premise 1 and 2. Therefore conclusion is false.

DONE. END.

I have addressed this one quote isn't universal