Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [Solomonic] proto-Solomonic tradition/ hermetic vs. King Solomon and Judeo-christian

Expand Messages
  • Aa H
    As interesting as you may be, I think I m getting off this merry-go-round. I think we are saying essentially the same thing, but approaching a different
    Message 1 of 51 , Dec 27, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      As interesting as you may be, I think I'm getting off this merry-go-round. I think we are saying essentially the same thing, but approaching a different conclusion. I believe that there is a Solomonic-grimoire-tradition and you are saying there isn't. But neither of us are saying they do not stem from earlier sources. However there is a very cute boy that I am going to see tonight which is far more interesting.
      I do wish to thank you for your time.

      Anyhow, I bid you adieu. Good luck and peace be with you.
      Your brother in the occult arts,
      A ah.


      To: solomonic@yahoogroups.comFrom: jakestrattonkent@...: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 10:48:39 +0000Subject: Re: [Solomonic] proto-Solomonic tradition/ hermetic vs. King Solomon and Judeo-christian




      On 26/12/2007, Aa H <enigmius93@...> wrote:> Personal attacks do not make your case any clearer, however it does enlighten us on your character.glad to enlighten you, ignoring my questions and saying my statementsaren't serious isn't likely to bring out my best side. Calling theSumerians and Canaanites 'Hermetic' does kinda validate the title'ignoramus'. Your grasp of history - as evidenced by your stated'opinion' is extremely tenuous; if this 'argument' has encouraged youto do something about that, good.> I'm just sayin'....>> And by the way, I have the Testament of Solomon in my hands as I write this email, and I repeat it is NOT an official grimoire(instruction manual) but a story that contains conjurations. The intent of the writing makes that clear.Glad it is so transparent to you. Have you read the 'Sage of thePyramids' aka the Black Pullet, that has a story too, but certainlyconstitutes a grimoire. Your use of the word 'official' ismeaningless, the grimoires were never officially sanctioned by theChurch - though other kinds of magic were.> No one on here is saying that their isn't older material that is transplanted or adopted into a judeo-christian framework, but that transplant; all those written within in that frameword that invokes the story of Solomon, and being an instruction manual(official grimoire) of conjuration is what makes up the Solomonic-Grimoire-tradition.>no mate, Judaeo-Christian terms have been transplanted into an older framework.Often as not the framework is Neoplatonist, or - especially in theearlier medieval period - purely goetic. In the early medieval periodJudeao-Christian material wasn't a dominant influence, and the Churchset out to influence the magical traditions rather than just suppressthem, and absorb some magical pracices and theory for its own use.Especially Astrology and Sympathia, but also some adapted pagansurvivals (replacing gods with angels and saints). When theRenassisance comes around the Christian magicians are massivelyrelieved to recover the Neoplatonic and Hermetic material because'official' Christian magic was largely gutless. The reason it becamegutless is due to the compromises in the earlier medieval period, fora survey of which see Valerie Flint's 'Rise of Magic in the MedievalPeriod' - she describes the evolution of Christian magic that had*nothing whatever* to do with the grimoires.The grimoires are essentially Goetic with a Christian veneer. Thatveneer is dispensible - though in some respects useful enough as is.My most frequently used incantations at present are actually straightSolomonic.PS read Agrippa.ALWaysJake






      _________________________________________________________________
      Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.
      http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_122007

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Jake Stratton-Kent
      ... don t blame you mate, it was going round in circles there. Basically I just don t see the Solomonic tradition as being self contained or beginning in the
      Message 51 of 51 , Jan 6, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        On 27/12/2007, Aa H <enigmius93@...> wrote:
        > As interesting as you may be, I think I'm getting off this merry-go-round. I think we are saying essentially the same thing, but approaching a different conclusion. I believe that there is a Solomonic-grimoire-tradition and you are saying there isn't. But neither of us are saying they do not stem from earlier sources. However there is a very cute boy that I am going to see tonight which is far more interesting.
        > I do wish to thank you for your time.
        >
        > Anyhow, I bid you adieu. Good luck and peace be with you.
        > Your brother in the occult arts,
        > A ah.
        >

        don't blame you mate, it was going round in circles there. Basically I
        just don't see the Solomonic tradition as being self contained or
        beginning in the medieval period.

        Its not self contained because its roots (In classical Theurgy
        particularly) are still necessary to understand much of the implied
        theory and practice. Its not exclusively medieval as there are earlier
        'technical hermetica' ascribed to Moses and Solomon.

        That's it put concisely; apologies for any redundancy.

        Best regards

        ALWays

        Jake
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.