Thread: Everybody has a Guardian Angel

Angels are forces of Divine Nature, and are not at our disposal to satisfy our desires. And perhaps out of ignorance, some people teach angelic rituals intended to cause harm to a specific person . In the High Magic, there is a ritual that aims to contact the Guardian Angel, for who practiced this ritual fully. it is very complicated, it takes about 6 months to complete. It's called Ritual of the Sacred Magic of Abramelin. I've had trouble with pseudo-occultists who do not agree when I tell them, for example that Angels has no form, much less human form. This shape, with wings and human, artistic design was invented in the Council of niceia centuries ago. It is too easy to assume that a being like us but with wings they must be higher. Angels are energy and because they are intelligent energy they can shape the way they want, but it is not common to use any form that pleases the humans.
Angels do not have the slightest interest in being contacted by humans and I assure you that some have a quite hostile relationship with the human race.
There was a time when i Practiced magic which dealt with demons, and when a ritual was not practiced the right way ,the most that happened is that there was no manifestation of the demon evoked. But in the Ritual of Abramelin, for example, the first time I tried to practice it I made some incorrect procedures and because of this I was sick for two months and if it was not my speed to get help I probably would have died. The second time I have performed the ritual all procedures were done properly and then I got the desired results. Angels do not forgive when the ritual is not done right. We can conclude that Angels have made me much more harm than Demons. I can recommend the movie
"The profecy", 1, 2 and 3, the angels referred to humans as "talking monkeys" .

I think the hga is just a term and not really necessarily an angel. you do seem to muddle them up; the hga from abramelin is not an angel like Michael. the hga is the true self, where as Michael is an entity outside ones self.

Indeed. Crowley calls the hga '' the secret and true self''.
It is this way because we cannot understand yet our spark of divinity - so it takes a form that is suitable to our paradigm/mind. In this case - most people in western society associate something like that with a Holy Guardian Angel.

Im sorry to disappoint you but I belong to an ancient order of Goetia and everybody that is a TRUE MAGE, knows that Crowley was a lunatic , so he didnt know the REAL Ritual of Abrammelin , or what it is really about, there is no connection what so ever with our higher self.

Here we go again....
Aleister Crowley was certainly a crazy and perverted megalomaniac he created the Golden Dawn and ruined the lives of all his disciples, and still managed to have two wives go to the asylum. He was a Terrible painter, terrible writer and poet. All his work is disgusting, foul uses terms and in many ways the issues are unrelated, as if the author entered in some kind of paranoia.

His side took the extreme to be bisexual, and came during a ritual to eat the excrement of his "Scarlet Woman" (name removed of Revelation given to the woman he used in his sexual perversions).

In Cairo he wrote "The Book of the Law," a confusing and absurd garbage that neither he understood half, obviously because it was written when he was completely numb of drugs. Nevertheless he tried to convince the world that the work was dictated to him by a demon called "Aiwass" that would be his "guardian angel." The book was well received by the Ordo Templi Orientis, "and from that time, they adopted and thelemite philosophy and Crowley went on to direct it. This order created a method of magic called "fri magick", or sex magic, that was from group sex acts during the rituals, even the simple masturbation on "talismans."

He liked to draw attention, going out in public with his costumes with the title of "most evil man in the world." In addition, he identified with the beast 666.
He was a friend and lover of Gerald Gardner (who created the Wicca, a cult like Thelema), and together were responsible for the current trivialization of esotericism.

Absurdities written by Crowley:
Without doubt it was a megalomaniac, as was said to be reincarnation of Dr John Dee (who invented the Enochian alphabet), and also be the reincarnation of an Egyptian high priest, and even of Eliphas Levi ( here there would have a chance of metempsychosis, but would still be a big jump before arriving in Crowley!).
Was said to be an avatar of the new era, where would establish a new cult on earth. Much like the ideal Hippie, who also believe that someday humans will stop working and be limited to smoking marijuana and being promiscuous.
Watch this paradox; enough to be hilarious, and bizarre. See what he says in the Book of Law: "wine and strange drugs are not harmful to anyone who is doing his true will. They only poison people who have cancer of original sin. If you are really free, so you can take cocaine simply as a chewing taffy. There is no test for a lesser soul than their attitude to drugs .... Let the world take opium, hashish and the rest, those who are subject to abuse them would be better dead. "

And some time later near the end of life, he writes: "There is no yearning for (the drug) when I'm free from care, to reach a minimum physiological, boring. I need a massage every day to get up and move, a supply of books, and forced a schedule of visits, company, food and drink.

And, unfortunately, some people refer to him as the greatest magician of the twentieth century ...

I dislike what i hear of Crowley too, but he knew much and was very smart. just because i don't like the man does not mean he didn't have anything to contribute. also Crowley didn't create the GD, and from the evidence i see or read/hear Westcott was the founder. the falling out of the London temple was more of a revolt; the other temples did not like the Crowley image or Mathers leadership.

I do not really think Crowley had anything new to say, only new to society at large.

He was a smart man, but as any smart man under the effect of drugs.

Everyone has their opinion on Crowley, for this topic I think that the concept of the HGA was never intended to be interpreted as a distinct entity in its own right. It was merely the anthropomorphizing of the concept of perfect will and intuition put into a format that people could grasp more easily. It's easier to say "Oh the HGA." than " Oh that part of you that guides you along the path according to influences and stimuli that you can't always consciously perceive." The latter is a mouthful and is hard to conceptualize and harder still to develop. It's much easier to make it into a entity and ritualize the conversation with this entity when in fact you're simply getting in touch with a higher facet of your perception.

As for Crowley himself I can't argue that he was an addict and came to a very sticky end but, I don't think he was nearly as addled and incompetent as many people make him out to be. Unfortunately in this society we have a tendency to equate any sort of mental instability, whether drug related or genetic, with idiocy and an inability to function intellectually. Many have pointed out certain technical inconsistencies in the borrowed techniques he took from other schools in the formation of Thelema. I would posit that those "mistakes" are not mistakes but, intentional deviations from the old forms.

I think if Crowley was guilty of anything it was of digging too deeply and pushing his boundaries too far. Every time he deviated from Western mores and societal norms for behavior he allowed himself fresher perspective and freedom from narrow perceptions that are forced upon us by governments, media, and education. In the end he pushed too far and looked too deep. I think whatever he found he drowned himself in alcohol and heroin trying to forget it and thus came to be both revered and reviled as an innovator and a charlatan.

That's my take on the man anyway. I enjoy his writing and his philosophy. I utilize his rituals because they work. Still I can see the bias against him and I can understand it since historically he did very little to inspire confidence and he certainly deviated from the ascetic lifestyle we tend to attribute men of power. I don't think that makes him irrelevant just different. My own experiences with magic have shown me very little that is light and good in this existence. Oh it's there but, the dark things and the scary things make it hard to find. I imagine if I had the courage to look even deeper I might end up like that, half mad with the other half doped up to keep the darkest of the things I have seen from bubbling up into the light like a new foulness.

Originally Posted by Vir Sapiens

Everyone has their opinion on Crowley, for this topic I think that the concept of the HGA was never intended to be interpreted as a distinct entity in its own right. It was merely the anthropomorphizing of the concept of perfect will and intuition put into a format that people could grasp more easily. It's easier to say "Oh the HGA." than " Oh that part of you that guides you along the path according to influences and stimuli that you can't always consciously perceive." The latter is a mouthful and is hard to conceptualize and harder still to develop. It's much easier to make it into a entity and ritualize the conversation with this entity when in fact you're simply getting in touch with a higher facet of your perception.

As for Crowley himself I can't argue that he was an addict and came to a very sticky end but, I don't think he was nearly as addled and incompetent as many people make him out to be. Unfortunately in this society we have a tendency to equate any sort of mental instability, whether drug related or genetic, with idiocy and an inability to function intellectually. Many have pointed out certain technical inconsistencies in the borrowed techniques he took from other schools in the formation of Thelema. I would posit that those "mistakes" are not mistakes but, intentional deviations from the old forms.

I think if Crowley was guilty of anything it was of digging too deeply and pushing his boundaries too far. Every time he deviated from Western mores and societal norms for behavior he allowed himself fresher perspective and freedom from narrow perceptions that are forced upon us by governments, media, and education. In the end he pushed too far and looked too deep. I think whatever he found he drowned himself in alcohol and heroin trying to forget it and thus came to be both revered and reviled as an innovator and a charlatan.

That's my take on the man anyway. I enjoy his writing and his philosophy. I utilize his rituals because they work. Still I can see the bias against him and I can understand it since historically he did very little to inspire confidence and he certainly deviated from the ascetic lifestyle we tend to attribute men of power. I don't think that makes him irrelevant just different. My own experiences with magic have shown me very little that is light and good in this existence. Oh it's there but, the dark things and the scary things make it hard to find. I imagine if I had the courage to look even deeper I might end up like that, half mad with the other half doped up to keep the darkest of the things I have seen from bubbling up into the light like a new foulness.

High Magic has everything to do with perception, you must be 100% sober to contact angels (Assuming that one have the real ritual), for example if you make one mistake you die, as simple as that .

Angels do not forgive, in fact there are many ways which they can kill someone, one example is to drain all the blood vapor or life force and then disperse it in the air to the entities that are present .

Some rituals are so complicated that they involve the use of certain music notes combined with three different languages , including Senzar the language of the Initiates , imagine the difficulty of that and multiply by 10.

Crowley rituals are as effective as any invented black magic rituals , of course he didnt know the real ancient rituals, as Papus (Gérard Encausse) did .

It is very easy to do harm to someone using black magic, but it is very hard to do it with High Magic that either can be black or white depending on the intention of the operator.

Now this is only my personal theory and not in any way shape or form meant to disparage any one path or viewpoint. I don't believe there is a distinction between High magic and Crowley's rituals anymore than there is a real distinction between one part of the ocean and another. I think that 90% of a ritual is flavor, a means of distinguishing a belief system within a larger practice. The notes and the words are the same as the "lesser" incantations of Crowley. That is to say it is not the incantation but the vibration that matters. Now this is not meant as a disparagement of your technique, in fact I applaud your dedication and your study and the commitment you have made to achieve the level of understanding and knowledge that you possess. I merely posit that what you manipulate is no different than what any other student of the occult manipulates when they enact their rituals.

The benefit you gain via training and dedication to your craft is that you have a concrete set of rules and a very particular understanding of the energies you manipulate. These rules, many of which are arbitrary I think, give you a framework that your mind can handle. I theorize, and I must stress that it is only a theory, that some of Crowley's more deviant behaviors may have been a direct result of him coming upon some truths without a proper framework to put them in.

I don't think it is entirely fair to dismiss Crowley out of hand. It cannot be argued that by the yardsticks of many occult traditions he misunderstood a great many things but, the things that he did understand and the new framework he put them in are important and valid with regards to the continued evolution of occult practice. By no means is he the end all be all of occult knowledge but neither was he merely an addict and a dabbler. Too many people, myself included, have a tendency to gloss over his many faults but, by that same token I think too many people tend to look over some of the things that he did add to our understanding even if the only thing that one can take away from his work was that the old ways can be reinterpreted successfully.

I respect your opinion of course,you seem to be very clever, but in my opinion what he did was a sort of involution of the occult practices and the banalizattion of magical practices.

But in a certain way this was a good thing because it kept real magic away from profanes.

I think the last truth that he found was .
"Dont Do drugs " In fact he wrote about this in his final moments.