Path: typhoon.sonic.net!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.pagan.magick
Subject: Re: Discussions About Magic (Rudiments, Paradigms, Components)
References: <40E7A6B5.6BEBA787@luckymojo.com> <8d9826c7.0407041318.61b669f8@posting.google.com> <cca136$8ko$1$830fa795@news.demon.co.uk> <40E9C430.A1FB7C12@luckymojo.com> <3SsKc.2963$54.37542@typhoon.sonic.net> <cde803192g@enews1.newsguy.com> <o60mf0hfs03hbvp3i1krll6bduqcgdn9ae@4ax.com> <40FB087B.AAE8BFC0@luckymojo.com> <vr1mf011mmqjoil1p3qmig2dc8o98sfhsb@4ax.com> <40FB1334.DC3BBD0F@luckymojo.com> <n9qmf0hf54tpv04nk8s3kduk1mroh0fqdo@4ax.com> <40FB9DD4.C70A752A@luckymojo.com> <j6nof0p67o9op5n78ft0tnjkamj1tn2638@4ax.com> <2m3t2iFitu4oU1@uni-berlin.de> <RU3Lc.51212$yd5.13066@twister.nyroc.rr.com> <2m53alFj3jleU1@uni-berlin.de>
From: nagasiva <yronwode.com@nagasiva>
Reply-To: spam@luckymojo.com
User-Agent: nn/6.6.0
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <KukLc.3380$54.46058@typhoon.sonic.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 02:25:46 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.201.242.18
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 1090376746 208.201.242.18 (Tue, 20 Jul 2004 19:25:46 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 19:25:46 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:47974 alt.magick:380342 alt.pagan.magick:41629

50040720 viii om

hi Alexander,

<snip>
#> BTD: So how is scrying external? These Enochean entities 
#> enter into your earholes, nostrils &c? Or perhaps some 
#> other orifice:)

LOL

Alexander Mulligan <alexander@mail2america.com>:
# Well. The lack of a response from any Enochians pretty much 
# tells the story, doesn't it?

not much of one that I can understand, no.

# Like all these other woo-woo schools of magick, getting them to talk
# about it in plain English is like trying to pull a daffodil's teeth.

depends on the approach and the venue. in uphill battles within an
adverse forum, it may not be worth the effort to explain complex
disciplines that will take several iterations to get clear when
there are sufficient introductions online at websites, for example.
this can especially be true in private where it would take multiple
repeats amounting the construction of a FAQ (which sources like
Benjamin Rowe have actually created for our perusal!) in order to
address them.

# You can summarize quantum mechanics in a 100 words or less, but not
# Enochian Magick.
#
# Right.

is this true? consider that practitioners may not be the best at
reflecting clearly what they are doing, and those who have a
facility with words may or may not be sufficiently familiar with
practice to reflect it to others. 

I find that persistent repeat of key questions usually results,
eventually, in substance, especially where compiled over time
and from a number of different angles. this is in part what led
me to construct the various Oooze Files available from:

	http://www.luckymojo.com/faqs.html

(from posts of substance made to this newsgroup). I don't remember
one focussed on Enochian Magic/k. perhaps we could create one that
might boil down such a summary that would please us. doing work on
behalf of the forum and those who read it is often lauded and
remembered by those who are relevant to its future. 

challenging people to create such a definition/summary is not 
always a very effective means of obtaining it. sometimes 
investigating very controversial pablum alternatives (e.g. 
from the Schulers, no relation to Tom of which I'm aware),
and presenting them within a forum where one wishes to 
spark interest can ignite comparative notes and espousings. 

generally the construction of key queries pertaining to the topic
(for this forum, a sub-topic of magic) is helpful to ferretting
out the boundaries and fundamentals of any single discipline or
body of knowledge and practice. generating these can be 
instrumental in beginning studies, especially if one is willing
to revise any of them, refine them, and investigate further.

nagasiva