Path: shell.portal.com!svc.portal.com!sdd.hp.com!frankensun.altair.com!nntp.coast.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.fibr.net!nntp.news.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!ip021.lax.primenet.com!user From: wizard@primenet.com (wizard) Newsgroups: alt.magick Subject: Re: Enochian Magick and the End of the World Date: 25 Dec 1995 14:09:01 -0700 Organization: primenet.com Lines: 51 Sender: root@primenet.com Message-ID: References: <4bmveu$dh5$1@mhadg.production.compuserve.com> X-Posted-By: ip021.lax.primenet.com In article <4bmveu$dh5$1@mhadg.production.compuserve.com>, Josh Norton <76635.766@CompuServe.COM> wrote: > Most of the so-called "experts" on Enochian magick haven't had enough > experience with the system for their opinions to have any value. They > are dilletantes who read someone else's work, misunderstand the > context of events, and then select or manufacture factoids to suit > their prejudices. Gerald Schueler is the worst example of this. If, in > fact, you are representing Tyson correctly, I would also place him in > this category. You don't see serious scholars of Dee's magick -- > Robert Turner, for instance -- putting out this sensationalist > nonsense. > Crowley's life could hardly be said to have gone downhill after 1909. > He lived another 40 years, and spent most of them accomplishing > productive work of one sort or another. > Josh, I have to agree with you on these points. It is absurd to say that Crowley's life went down hill after 1909. Over the next 40 years he produced some of his best writings. His book on the Tarot, one of his last works, is also one of his best works (IMO). Further, I would add that if Jesus existed, the same experts would have to claim that his life was also a failure. But look at the results (well, okay, he has lots of followers who do crap in his name, but that's another point). Likewise, more of Crowely's work is in print and he has more students than any time in history. This sounds much more like growing success rather than "going downhill." Concerning your comments on Enochian, I am again with you. The Schuelers mish-mosh adding everything from Theosophical clap-trap to cup-cake eucharists make a joke of Enochiana. If you really read their material you get the feeling that they have never done a ritual, let alone an Enochian ritual, in their lives. As to Donald Tyson, I would question the claim that he a good researcher. In previous books he has made wild claims about ordering gods around (Donald, do you really think you ordered Thor around? If so, you're kidding yourself). His "commentary" to Agrippa is either quotes from other people or his own beliefs, some of which are so erroneous as to be silly. (Donald, don't talk about astrology if you don't understand it!) I would have to question any of Tyson's alleged research. Of course, look at his publisher. How many GOOD books do they publish compared to bad ones? Wizard