Angels

solas

following the "belief's" thread, thought I would take the oppertunity to lighten the mood
I'm interested in hearing others opinions on the existance of angelic beings or entities.
(or maybe just a discussion on the heirachy of energies would be good...we all believe in energies right?)

what ya think?

Sapien

In my experience, the designation of certain entities as angelic is, more often than not, arbitrary. Relating to the better known angelic hierarchies, the systems of choirs - cherubim, seraphim, etc., common in Judeo-Christian lore and the Qabalah, many of the nominal angels can be as nasty as the corresponding demons.

It is a matter of definition really. Most people assume a certain moral nature associated with angels - i.e. that they are fundamentally good. I have found that few of the angels described in grimoires or other esoteric sources give the impression of being particularly good, or even remotely benign.

The other occult meaning of angel is, of course, the Higher Guardian Angel, made famous by Abramelin the Mage, Abraham the Jew, and Frater Perdurabo. These entities, connected symbiotically to every person and encountered by every adept at a certain point in his or her spiritual development (the attainment of Tipharet in the Tree of Life), are overwhelmingly positive forces. However, it is more accurate to conceive of these angels as aspects of the higher self than as separate intelligences, unlike those described in the grimoires.

Kernel

My favourite energy is electricity.

Nevyn

The paranormal forum is more about what can be explained, quantified
and researached.
Maybe you should look at some of the thread in the
sprituality about angels.

stevenmu

To be honest most of my impressions of what Angels are would come from the catholic churchs idea of them, with only bits and pieces picked up elsewhere (mainly around these forums ). Angels tend to be portrayed as being of a superior order to humans or more divine, and that we're the equivalent of playthings to them. I don't mean to sound too egotistical but I kind of have trouble accepting that there's anything 'better' than me (or anyone else). I suppose I could accept though that angels are simply other spiritual beings, who happen to be more knowledgeable and experienced in the ways of...erm...being a spiritual being.

Sapien, your explanation of Higher Guardian Angels makes a lot of sense to me, I can see how people who may become aware of 'something' without understanding it's nature could mistake it for a seperate intelligent entity.

Kernel wrote:

My favourite energy is electricity.

What about kinetic, or are you just too lazy ?

Kernel

stevenmu wrote:

What about kinetic, or are you just too lazy ?

I am rather lazy, and kinetic is still too much hard work! Nah, it's definitely electricity.

Zillah

Sapien wrote:

In my experience, the designation of certain entities as angelic is, more often than not, arbitrary. Relating to the better known angelic hierarchies, the systems of choirs - cherubim, seraphim, etc., common in Judeo-Christian lore and the Qabalah, many of the nominal angels can be as nasty as the corresponding demons.

It is a matter of definition really. Most people assume a certain moral nature associated with angels - i.e. that they are fundamentally good. I have found that few of the angels described in grimoires or other esoteric sources give the impression of being particularly good, or even remotely benign.

The other occult meaning of angel is, of course, the Higher Guardian Angel, made famous by Abramelin the Mage, Abraham the Jew, and Frater Perdurabo. These entities, connected symbiotically to every person and encountered by every adept at a certain point in his or her spiritual development (the attainment of Tipharet in the Tree of Life), are overwhelmingly positive forces. However, it is more accurate to conceive of these angels as aspects of the higher self than as separate intelligences, unlike those described in the grimoires.

But...but... Every bit of that was read somewhere, yes? Have you ever met or seen an angel...? Is all that you are going on, ultimately, what other people have told you?

Oryx

Zillah wrote:

But...but... Every bit of that was read somewhere, yes? Have you ever met or seen an angel...? Is all that you are going on, ultimately, what other people have told you?

Is this 'lets make Sapien prove everything' week and I missed it? ALL of our accepted knowledge has been read somewhere, unless were researchers or scientists
All we can do here is quote beliefs, or in the case of some of us we can discuss our actual experiences and be beaten over the head for being silly. :rolleyes:

solas

thead wrote:

The paranormal forum is more about what can be explained, quantified
and researached.

as the mod of the paranormal forum I'm aware of what is appropriate for discussion here.
Angels may fall into the same realm as any paranormal phenomena, people have had experiences with spirits of all categories, as far as I am concerned experiences with angelic entities are no different.

sapien wrote:

However, it is more accurate to conceive of these angels as aspects of the higher self than as separate intelligences, unlike those described in the grimoires.

do you not think your experiences summoning entities or Crowleys summoning entities is much the same....and that really we are just speaking about aspects of the higher self?

kernel wrote:

My favourite energy is electricity.

there was me thinking you had loads to say.

Talliesin

stevenmu wrote:

Angels tend to be portrayed as being of a superior order to humans or more divine, and that we're the equivalent of playthings to them. I don't mean to sound too egotistical but I kind of have trouble accepting that there's anything 'better' than me (or anyone else).

Funny, Milton made the source of Lucifer Morningstar's rebellion the fact that Lucifer considered himself to be better than humans, and God didn't.

stevenmu

Never did any Milton in school, and the stuff we did do put me completely off any reading of my own. I do remember hearing that he was pretty controversial (I can't remember now if that's why we never studied him, or was it becaus ehis works tend to be pretty long), and that would be a very controversial view christianity wise.

Sapien

solas wrote:

do you not think your experiences summoning entities or Crowleys summoning entities is much the same....and that really we are just speaking about aspects of the higher self?

I dread to write this, given responses from Kernel and his less original fanclub (that's you Zillah) to my previous admissions, but I have summoned angels as well. As I said, they are often indistinguishable from entities described as demons. The reason for this is that "demon" is a more correct term for most of these beings - deriving from the greek daimon, which means simply "spirit". However, many magickal documents had to be safeguarded against the authorities, such as the Inquisition, and changed in small ways to make them seem less like "Black Magick", and more like Theurgia, that is to say, holy, celestial magick. And so many demons (daimonos) become angels, and demons became evil.

There are many established magickians who believe that all entities that can be summoned - demons, angels, elementals and everything in between - are hidden aspects of the self, and that summoning them is tantamount to accessing or activating parts of the unconscious mind. In fact that is how many people first become involved in magick, as this conception of it makes it seem quite sensible and mundane, like a kind of theatrical psychology. I no longer believe this interpretation, and have come to be convinced of the objective existence of most spiritual entities.

The Holy Guardian Angel (HGA) is a special case, and is altogether unlike other angels dealt with in magick. In fact, using the word "angel" to describe both is a misnomer. Crowley chose to retain the term from the original medieval operation "Communion and Conversation with the Holy Guardian Angel" set down by Abraham the Jew because he saw no reason to modernise it on the basis of other, slightly quaint and silly-sounding connotations it might have. He was contrary like that. He believed that if someone was put off performing an operation (like Conversation with the HGA, which took at least 6 months in complete isolation) because it sounded childish, then they had no business doing it at all.

The HGA is simply a part of the self that is inaccessible to people while in the ordinary state of mind, just like the more famous "Dweller on the Threshold", the Abyss, or ultimately, the soul. There are other beings, called angels, which have as little to do with people as they can manage, and are generally quite annoyed at being approached.

solas

sapien wrote:

There are many established magickians who believe that all entities that can be summoned - demons, angels, elementals and everything in between - are hidden aspects of the self, and that summoning them is tantamount to accessing or activating parts of the unconscious mind. In fact that is how many people first become involved in magick, as this conception of it makes it seem quite sensible and mundane, like a kind of theatrical psychology. I no longer believe this interpretation, and have come to be convinced of the objective existence of most spiritual entities.

so if we take for example Archangel Michael, historically conveyed as the protector. An aspect of the higher self or and entity in its own right?
For the purpose of this thread I call upon the archangel Michael.

Kernel

Sapien wrote:

I dread to write this, given responses from Kernel and his less original fanclub (that's you Zillah) to my previous admissions, but I have summoned angels as well. As I said, they are often indistinguishable from entities described as demons. The reason for this is that "demon" is a more correct term for most of these beings - deriving from the greek daimon, which means simply "spirit". However, many magickal documents had to be safeguarded against the authorities, such as the Inquisition, and changed in small ways to make them seem less like "Black Magick", and more like Theurgia, that is to say, holy, celestial magick. And so many demons (daimonos) become angels, and demons became evil.

Thats what they say alright.What did the angels look like? How did they communicate? Did they appear before you on the physical plane? What did they tell you?

Sapien wrote:

There are many established magickians who believe that all entities that can be summoned - demons, angels, elementals and everything in between - are hidden aspects of the self, and that summoning them is tantamount to accessing or activating parts of the unconscious mind.

Is that because all the summoning takes place in your own mind? That is to say, that the beings don't physically manifest themselves to you, but rather appear to you when in a trance or meditative state?

Sapien wrote:

I no longer believe this interpretation, and have come to be convinced of the objective existence of most spiritual entities.

Really? Why is it that you've come to that conclusion?

Sapien wrote:

The HGA is simply a part of the self that is inaccessible to people while in the ordinary state of mind, just like the more famous "Dweller on the Threshold", the Abyss, or ultimately, the soul. There are other beings, called angels, which have as little to do with people as they can manage, and are generally quite annoyed at being approached.

Wow, that sounds interesting. How do they show that they are annoyed? Do they tell you to stop bothering them or?

Sapien

Why Kernel, what interesting questions! I shall do my very best to answer them in a clear way. Of course, in some instances, I will not be able to give specific information, as I'm sure you will understand. For instance, I cannot name any angels with whom I have communicated, as a matter of politeness and, in some cases, contractual obligation.

Kernel wrote:

What did the angels look like? How did they communicate? Did they appear before you on the physical plane? What did they tell you?

These things vary greatly from one entity to another, and also depend upon the circumstances of the contact. I can say with certainty that of the angels I have encountered, and of those described in the grimoires, none appear in a white robe with wings and a halo. For the most part they present a human form, often with odd apparel or equipment. Crowns are very common, musical instruments, and weapons. Occasionally an angel will appear theriomorphic - as an animal or with animal body parts. They will often change appearance in the course of an evocation, at the behest of the magickian, or spontaneously.

The manner in which they communicate depends on the format of the evocation, whether it is astral working, skrying, invocation, evocation or what not. They can speak through clairaudience, without presenting a visible form, or they can simply appear at the appropriate juncture and speak to one in a manner that is indistinguishable from another person speaking by the use of lungs full of air and vocal chords. Their voices can be as varied and bizarre as their physical appearances - ranging from high-pitched and singsong, to deep, gravely and booming.

Kernel wrote:

Is that because all the summoning takes place in your own mind? That is to say, that the beings don't physically manifest themselves to you, but rather appear to you when in a trance or meditative state?

Many forms of contact with spirits could be said to take place within the mind of the operator. Astral working is undertaken from a still, meditative state, looking to any third party observers as though the magickian were asleep. Skrying requires intense concentration over a focal object such as a crystal, mirror, or liquid, and can, in rare instances, result in peripheral physical phenomena observable to others besides the seer. A full blown evocation to physical manifestation can, if successful, cause startling physical phenomena, including persistent visual presences and poltergeist activity. Whether or not the entities that manifest would be solid to the touch cannot be known given the strict separation of operator and spirit by the circle, and often the Triangle of the Art.

Kernel wrote:

Why is it that you've come to that conclusion?

Two reasons. Recent ventures into purist interpretations of grimoiric instructions have yielded extremely tangible results, as I have described. However, before seeing this, I had become convinced of the objective reality of these entities on theoretical and intellectual grounds. The "What do you believe?" thread was intended for discussion of these ideas. I think you're familiar with it.

Kernel wrote:

Wow, that sounds interesting. How do they show that they are annoyed? Do they tell you to stop bothering them or?

Indeed. Some entities come willingly, others resist with terrifying energy. This willingness depends on a number of things, importantly the magickian him- or herself, his level of control over the proceedings, and also the format of the contact. Spirits are generally more willing, often eager to engage in casual, fleeting contact, as they are less constrained by it and are not subject to the will of the evoker. However, a full evocation represents a violation of the autonomy of the spirit, and they will generally try to prevent it from happening or turn the situation to their own ends.

There is also an important difference between the reactions of genuinely angelic entities and those that are of lower orders (although often it is impossible to categorise a spirit in these terms, as I have said). The archangels, for instance, who are as close to proper angels as you are likely to find (although by no means friendly), will generally condescend to communicate with indifference and impatience. Lower angels will be more recalcitrant, and spirits with demonic characteristics will often try to hurt one. Angels are convinced to cooperate by the merit, intention and purity of the magickian, demons are forced to obey by his authority. This purity and authority is fundamentally the same thing, but the dynamics in dealing with the entities are very different.

Sapien

Why Kernel, what interesting questions! I shall do my very best to answer them in a clear way. Of course, in some instances, I will not be able to give specific information, as I'm sure you will understand. For instance, I cannot name any angels with whom I have communicated, as a matter of politeness and, in some cases, contractual obligation.

Kernel wrote:

What did the angels look like? How did they communicate? Did they appear before you on the physical plane? What did they tell you?

These things vary greatly from one entity to another, and also depend upon the circumstances of the contact. I can say with certainty that of the angels I have encountered, and of those described in the grimoires, none appear in a white robe with wings and a halo. For the most part they present a human form, often with odd apparel or equipment. Crowns are very common, musical instruments, and weapons. Occasionally an angel will appear theriomorphic - as an animal or with animal body parts. They will often change appearance in the course of an evocation, at the behest of the magickian, or spontaneously.

The manner in which they communicate depends on the format of the evocation, whether it is astral working, skrying, invocation, evocation or what not. They can speak through clairaudience, without presenting a visible form, or they can simply appear at the appropriate juncture and speak to one in a manner that is indistinguishable from another person speaking by the use of lungs full of air and vocal chords. Their voices can be as varied and bizarre as their physical appearances - ranging from high-pitched and singsong, to deep, gravely and booming.

Kernel wrote:

Is that because all the summoning takes place in your own mind? That is to say, that the beings don't physically manifest themselves to you, but rather appear to you when in a trance or meditative state?

Many forms of contact with spirits could be said to take place within the mind of the operator. Astral working is undertaken from a still, meditative state, looking to any third party observers as though the magickian asleep. Skrying requires intense concentration over a focal object such as a crystal, mirror, or liquid, and can, in rare instances, result in peripheral physical phenomena observable to others besides the seer. A full blown evocation to physical manifestation can, if successful, cause startling physical phenomena, including persistent visual presences and poltergeist activity. Whether or not the entities that manifest would be solid to the touch cannot be known given the strict separation of operator and spirit by the circle, and often the Triangle of the Art.

Kernel wrote:

Why is it that you've come to that conclusion?

Two reasons. Recent ventures into purist interpretations of grimoiric instructions have yielded extremely tangible results, as I have described. However, before seeing this, I had become convinced of the objective reality of these entities on theoretical and intellectual grounds. The "What do you believe?" thread was intended for discussion of these ideas. I think you're familiar with it.

Kernel wrote:

Wow, that sounds interesting. How do they show that they are annoyed? Do they tell you to stop bothering them or?

Indeed. Some entities come willingly, others resist with terrifying energy. This willingness depends on a number of things, importantly the magickian him- or herself, his level of control over the proceedings, and also the format of the contact. Spirits are generally more willing, often eager to engage in casual, fleeting contact, as they are less constrained by it and are not subject to the will of the evoker. However, a full evocation represents a violation of the autonomy of the spirit, and they will generally try to prevent it from happening or turn the situation to their own ends.

There is also an important difference between the reactions of genuinely angelic entities and those that are of lower orders (although often it is impossible to categorise a spirit in these terms, as I have said). The archangels, for instance, who are as close to proper angels as you are likely to find (although by no means friendly), will generally condescend to communicate with indifference and impatience. Lower angels will be more recalcitrant, and spirits with demonic characteristics will often try to hurt one. Angels are convinced to cooperate by the merit, intention and purity of the magickian, demons are forced to obey by his authority. This purity and authority is fundamentally the same thing, but the dynamics in dealing with the entities are very different.

solas wrote:

so if we take for example Archangel Michael, historically conveyed as the protector. An aspect of the higher self or and entity in its own right?

Very much real in his own right.

An insight I would offer into the nature of genuine angels is that they are not very intelligent. They are rudimentary forces of nature, powerful in their universality, but not sophisticated. The more important an angel, the higher up it is in the hierarchies, the less complicated, the more basic it is. The standard Golden Dawn elementary archangels for example, Michael, Raphael, Gabriel and Uriel, are personifications of the four quarters - extremely potent, but very simple.

My point is that, while Michael is powerful and real, one cannot really have a conversation with him - no more than one could with the West Wind, the colour Blue, or the number 93. Demons, on the other hand, are much less powerful (with some exceptions) but are sophisticated and complex intelligences. Not only can they maintain conversation on a range of topics given a sufficiently steady contact, but can demonstrate a sense of humour.

Sapien

Er, sorry for the repetition - I went to post then decided to append with an answer to solas.

Kernel

Sapien wrote:

Why Kernel, what interesting questions! I shall do my very best to answer them in a clear way. Of course, in some instances, I will not be able to give specific information, as I'm sure you will understand. For instance, I cannot name any angels with whom I have communicated, as a matter of politeness and, in some cases, contractual obligation.

What happens if you tell their names to people? How would they know anyway, are they boards users?

Sapien wrote:

The manner in which they communicate depends on the format of the evocation, whether it is astral working, skrying, invocation, evocation or what not. They can speak through clairaudience, without presenting a visible form, or they can simply appear at the appropriate juncture and speak to one in a manner that is indistinguishable from another person speaking by the use of lungs full of air and vocal chords. Their voices can be as varied and bizarre as their physical appearances - ranging from high-pitched and singsong, to deep, gravely and booming.

I'm not a big fan of astral projection as you might have guessed, but am interested in the physical. Where did you summon these entities? I presume you need a big space? How long did you speak to them, and what information did they give you? Are they vastly more intelligent and knowledgeable than us?

Sapien wrote:

Many forms of contact with spirits could be said to take place within the mind of the operator. Astral working is undertaken from a still, meditative state, looking to any third party observers as though the magickian were asleep. Skrying requires intense concentration over a focal object such as a crystal, mirror, or liquid, and can, in rare instances, result in peripheral physical phenomena observable to others besides the seer.

Both scrying and astral projection, in my opinion, are just methods of tapping into the subjective side of our minds. The periphery physical effects could be accounted for as latent and unused psychic abillities. But I wouldn't put much faith in the entities being real through these.

Sapien wrote:

A full blown evocation to physical manifestation can, if successful, cause startling physical phenomena, including persistent visual presences and poltergeist activity. Whether or not the entities that manifest would be solid to the touch cannot be known given the strict separation of operator and spirit by the circle, and often the Triangle of the Art.

The protective circle you speak of, is this composed of salt and based on the circles of Solomon? In a more simple form of evocation to the physical, what steps of preparation would be necessary? Have you tried the Necronomicon rituals with any success?

Sapien wrote:

Two reasons. Recent ventures into purist interpretations of grimoiric instructions have yielded extremely tangible results, as I have described. However, before seeing this, I had become convinced of the objective reality of these entities on theoretical and intellectual grounds.

Have the tangible results you experienced provided you with anything specific to suggest that they are real, free thinking entities? Perhaps scientific knowledge that is not known, or which would have been inaccessible to your subjective or objective mind?

Sapien wrote:

The "What do you believe?" thread was intended for discussion of these ideas. I think you're familiar with it.

Hmm.. where's that thread?

Sapien wrote:

Indeed. Some entities come willingly, others resist with terrifying energy. This willingness depends on a number of things, importantly the magickian him- or herself, his level of control over the proceedings, and also the format of the contact.

How do you exercise control over these entities if you cannot have physical contact with them, and aren't you protected by the circle/triangle anyway? And with what kind of energy do they resist?

Sapien wrote:

Spirits are generally more willing, often eager to engage in casual, fleeting contact, as they are less constrained by it and are not subject to the will of the evoker. However, a full evocation represents a violation of the autonomy of the spirit, and they will generally try to prevent it from happening or turn the situation to their own ends.

Can you summon any dead spirit once you know their name?

Sapien wrote:

There is also an important difference between the reactions of genuinely angelic entities and those that are of lower orders (although often it is impossible to categorise a spirit in these terms, as I have said). The archangels, for instance, who are as close to proper angels as you are likely to find (although by no means friendly), will generally condescend to communicate with indifference and impatience.

What have they communicated to you? Specifically?

Sapien wrote:

Lower angels will be more recalcitrant, and spirits with demonic characteristics will often try to hurt one. Angels are convinced to cooperate by the merit, intention and purity of the magickian, demons are forced to obey by his authority. This purity and authority is fundamentally the same thing, but the dynamics in dealing with the entities are very different.

How do you exercise this authority, by sheer force of will? What do the demons look like? The same as the angels? Do they have any normal influence over everyday life? Have you ever thought of videotaping a summoning? Surely video evidence of other worldly entities would be profound and worthwhile?

Sapien

Kernel wrote:

What happens if you tell their names to people? How would they know anyway, are they boards users?

These entities are summoned into one's presence by the use of their names - their names serve as a connection to the magickian, a beacon, if you will. To use their names in a profane context, or to disseminate them unnecessarily is to dilute their power, damage their sanctity and offend the angel in question. The rules governing interactions with angels can generally be seen as reducing to extremely strict politeness.

Kernel wrote:

Where did you summon these entities? I presume you need a big space? How long did you speak to them, and what information did they give you? Are they vastly more intelligent and knowledgeable than us?

For full evocation to physical manifestation it is necessary to use a consecrated space, large enough to hold a circle, traditionally nine feet in diameter. One tends not to take up their time with frivolous conversation, and they are not "intelligent" in the conventional sense. In fact they are largely incapable of perceiving the nature or circumstances of human existence. What they offer is a kind of "understanding" that is important in esoteric philosophy and may be difficult to describe here, which is distinct from "knowledge", or indeed "wisdom". In a sense, they do not transmit information, rather they imbue the operator with particular properties, or do so to other people, places or things at the operators behest. As solas has pointed out, "protection" is a good example, as is "healing". They can be more remote than that - but one won't get lottery numbers or the schematics to a nuclear submarine through angelic congress.

Kernel wrote:

Both scrying and astral projection, in my opinion, are just methods of tapping into the subjective side of our minds. The periphery physical effects could be accounted for as latent and unused psychic abillities. But I wouldn't put much faith in the entities being real through these.

That is a valid opinion - but of course, to the sceptic, believing in discarnate intelligences and believing in latent supernatural human faculties are hardly very different in terms of plausibility. Frankly, the causality is unimportant. It has long been understood that the capacity of the entities to manifest properly is dependent on the ability of the magickian to generate a great deal of mental and emotional energy. It could be interpreted that the magickian does all the work for the spirit, in terms of the physical phenomena concomitant with an evocation - this does not mean that the spirit does not possess its own mind and will independent of the magickian, merely that the magickian is a conduit for the spirit to interact with the physical world.

Kernel wrote:

The protective circle you speak of, is this composed of salt and based on the circles of Solomon? In a more simple form of evocation to the physical, what steps of preparation would be necessary?

Most of the circles described by the grimoires are similar to the Solomonic type - some more complicated, some far simpler, all using holy names and symbols. This page show some variants - from different texts and towards different procedures. The first is the circle of Solomon - the most famous, oft used, and powerful. Some magickians will use the same circle, often of their own devising, for all procedures, other, more purist magickians, will use the circle specified by the source text. They are generally painted or drawn out with chalk - the salt circle is more of a pagan idea.

The preparatory steps can differ greatly from one operation to another. Often days, or even weeks, of abstinence is required beforehand. Most rituals will be preceded by a bath or cleansing. Sometimes a liturgical procession into the chamber of the operation is required. The space must be sanctified, usually by a banishing - most will use standard formulae for this, such as those formalised by the Golden Dawn. The Lesser Banishing Ritual of the Pentagram is, I'm sure, the most frequently performed piece of magick in the world. Then, the ritual can begin in earnest, with the recitation of holy names and the use of magickal weapons and tools, the brandishing of sigils. Eventually a sufficient amount of energy will be generated, the magickian will enter a kind of divine state, and the spirit will become manifest.

Kernel wrote:

Have you tried the Necronomicon rituals with any success?

I am a fan of H P Lovecraft and his novellas. The "Necronomicon" is, I believe, a cynical invention designed to cash in on his popularity, and I find that there are more than enough genuine, ancient texts to work from without resorting to flagrantly fictive copies. I realise that many magickians obtain results from working with the "Nec", and this is not troublesome to those who believe it to be a fiction. Even most who do use it admit to the fact that it was put together early in the 20th century.

Kernel wrote:

Have the tangible results you experienced provided you with anything specific to suggest that they are real, free thinking entities? Perhaps scientific knowledge that is not known, or which would have been inaccessible to your subjective or objective mind?

I have explained that angels cannot give this kind of information, and that they are not really "free thinking". I have obtained results that demonstrate the power of these entities, and their ability to greatly affect one's life. Other entities, on the other hand, demonstrate a high degree of free thought, and can offer many kinds of obscure information. Mostly this will be pertaining to matters of their own existence, which are often useful to the magickian nevertheless. It is difficult to extract clear and meaningful information of a more terrestrial matter, however, as this requires that one provides the spirit with enough energy to obtain it. Contact with the physical world, in order to speak with a magickian or read a car license plate, is not a natural state for a demon, and requires magickal intervention.

Kernel wrote:

How do you exercise control over these entities if you cannot have physical contact with them, and aren't you protected by the circle/triangle anyway? And with what kind of energy do they resist?

This is beginning to edge into the realm of magickal theory and metaphysics, and so you'll forgive me if I don't take it upon myself to initiate you into the "grades". Suffice it to say that a magickian, through his own spiritual development, acquires authority that is recognised by demons and angels alike. The magickian speaks magickal formulae, holy words, and the names of God, enters an empowered state, and imposes his will on the proceedings. One's ability to do this springs from an understanding of the nature of the universe, and the place of each entity in it.

Kernel wrote:

Can you summon any dead spirit once you know their name?

Necromancy is another kind of magick altogether. Perhaps I should clarify. When I write "spirit", I do not mean spirit of the dead, or ghost. I mean spiritual entities who have never been people (with some exceptions). I have not summoned the dead, though it can be done in some circumstances and in a certain manner.

Kernel wrote:

What have they communicated to you? Specifically?

I will not tell you that. The opportunities to speak with angels, so long as you can afford some books, or, lo!, access the internet, are just as available to you as they are to me. I will not make common and debased that which I have earned and achieved just so as to satisfy a very ordinary argument. And you could not seriously have expected me to.

Kernel wrote:

What do the demons look like? The same as the angels? Do they have any normal influence over everyday life? Have you ever thought of videotaping a summoning? Surely video evidence of other worldly entities would be profound and worthwhile?

Demons can look very similar to angels. They can be beautiful and enchanting, just as angels can by ugly and frightening. It is not useful to think of them as having influence over everyday life, rather that they can be made to influence everyday life. There is no reason for me to think that they impinge very greatly on the world except when they are instructed to, or in anomalous situations that could be seen as being analogous to hauntings. I see no reason to attempt to resolve the normal functioning of nature into the aggregation of the interacting and competing actions of discarnate intelligences.

I have never sought to videotape a summoning. It would be difficult, troublesome, and I have no inclination to do so. The circumstances of a ritual are delicate and sensitive, and more importantly, one's state of mind in ritual is of central importance, and would be very much upset by the presence of the unblinking eye of a camcorder.

I am not after Randi's Millions. I am just a simple magickian getting along with the help of my Art and the cooperation of some unusual associates. I do not need to be convinced, and I feel no desire to convince others.

Zillah

Sapien wrote:

In fact they are largely incapable of perceiving the nature or circumstances of human existence. What they offer is a kind of "understanding" that is important in esoteric philosophy and may be difficult to describe here, which is distinct from "knowledge", or indeed "wisdom". In a sense, they do not transmit information, rather they imbue the operator with particular properties, or do so to other people, places or things at the operators behest.

Doesn't that strike you as terribly convenient?

CodeMonkey

What sapien wrote is certainly interesting but there is absolutely no reason to not think he is just very well read and very imaginative. Or if he does indeed believe in all that then he's very self delusional. Yes it's impolite to question people's beliefs here, it's probably against the charter and all that but...omg...there's no way anyone can buy these extreme claims without ANY kinda of proof. I bet people are just keeping quiet cause they are too polite to say anything or seem hyprocritically to criticise after their run in with a non believer.

Ok, had my say, no doubt sapien will come back with a very well thought reply about basically how he's right and i'm wrong. Another chance for him to demonstrate his amazing grasp of the english language. Not really interested in reading about someone's fantasy world anymore so will be ignoring this forum for a while...ban away if you must

stevenmu

CodeMonkey wrote:

there's no way anyone can buy these extreme claims without ANY kinda of proof.

I don't think Sapien is asking anyone to believe or 'buy' anything. Solas asked people for opinions, Sapien provided his (or hers, I don't think Sapien has alluded to gender in previous posts), I don't see why it can't be just that simple.