Important note to the readers of this thread.
There are two highly divergent versions of the "Abramelin". The common "Mathers" translation is not only incomplete it appears to me to be corrupt. It begins fine, but then in book 2, instead of enagaging in Practical Kabbalah as I have learned it, it delves into demonolarty. The beginning of the 3rd book confirms that Belial is expected to do the bidding of the practionner. Belial is either the 3rd or 4th Hell, if I recall. It is both a demon and a place which should be well known and understood by those engaging with this subject matter. But the earlier approbations discourage working with anything that is evil. This is a red flag for those who are aware.
The German manuscripts are known by scholars to be the authority. In comparisson, the Mather's version appears to be a honey pot. Designed to trap those who are drawn to it for selfish motives. The German version includes 2 key points which indicate this beyond the divergent magical content.
1) The German version prohibits taking money for this craft and knowledge. The Mather's version seems to encourage it.
2) And this is most important: The German version reflects precisely what I posted earlier in the thread. One needs to know what they are writing. There is a lot more to this than putting letters in a specific position in a grid. The Mather's version skips this entirely. Please dear readers understand the implications of this.
If the one attempting these works for selfish motives and does not know what they are invoking/evoking, then they can very easily be calling the Kracken for its meal, which happens to be the practioner themself. The ignorant are potentially putting themselves on the menu, then ringing the dinner bell. The author seems to have intentionally omitted a vital warning to the target which would encourage them to avoid the snare and put away the book or ask for help.
There is also a massive gap in the initiation protocol when comparing the two versions. The German version includes atonement. The Mathers version does not, as far as I can tell. This is important. Lacking atonement, the practioner who has put themselves on the menu, then is calling the kracken, is lacking any and all protections for themself, and potentially others.
It's bad news. Caveat Emptor. This is common sense. If you don't know what you're saying, and you don't know what you're doing, and you don't understand how it's supposed to work, it's bad idea engaging in it. If you don't know how electricty works, climbing up the pole to hook up the the "main-line", because it's in an incomplete instruction manual, and it sounds like fun and adventure and will profit you somehow, is a bad bad plan.
Here is the the quote from the German, complete, translation.
Ziran wrote: ↑Sat Oct 07, 2023 2:55 am
Spida wrote: ↑Fri Oct 06, 2023 9:10 pm
It makes sense that you would draw it on the square
the same way it's read.
Right,
how is it being read AND understood, by the one who is making it. same question for the one who will be gazing at it. or possessing it?
When it is being crafted, is the maker's intellectual investment, like you described, including a mental directive: "reverse order, reverse the order, reverse the order..." while the letters are being written? There's a lot more to this than just putting the correct letter in the correct position in an array. That's just writing something.
And are the hebrew letters actually being used? or are english letters being used but written in reverse?
For those who have eyes and ears, this confirms I actually know what I'm talking about. And I only have your best interests in my heart and mind. When reading the quote from the book I posted, notice, non-Jews are not being prohibited from this content. And this makes sense. The Jewish people have been scattered and hidden for over a thousand years when this book was written. No one knows who is or is not of the Jewish ethnic background. My position is, everyone is considered equal. If they are claiming to be of a specific heritage, and they would like to be treated as such, so be it. I am not an ordained Rabbi. And making those kinds of distinctions is far far outside my personal moral code, which I take very seriously.
Sicnerely,