Posted 07 July 2009 - 12:13 AM
I'm reading that chapter right now and I find it a rather poor, "cute" term to use.
[QUOTE]Kenneth Grant uses the term "typhonian" as well as "draconian" more to designate what he considers the most ancient of magical traditions. Though poetic, in a magical sense, most of Grant's work revolves around the idea that certain traditions up to the present day have carried this underlying "typhonian current" within their mythopoetic stuctures and practices. He makes that clear in his first book The Magical Revival. Whether or not his claims are well-founded in any scientific research is irrelevant. Those who criticize his "research" usually don't take into consideration and/or probably don't know about a method that is called "psychic questing" (I don't really like that term but it fits for the most part). [/QUOTE]
Well, that has a lot of problems. As I do imagine "psychic questing" tells just as much about the occultist as it does the subject matter.
[QUOTE]Psychic questing usually involves investigating sacred sites or landscapes by researching their histories and then navigating them physically but using magical or psychical means. Grant obviously uses a sort of "psychic questing" in his method of research and navigation which is why, from a magical or occult standpoint, he is justified in uncovering magical meaning or poetic facts coded in fictional works, art, music, pseudo-science, pseudo-anthropology or damned near anywhere he can pull it from. The landscapes that Grant explores and navigates don't usually concern any real-world geographies. [/QUOTE]
Well, I disagree: I don't think from an occult stand point, research that is merely intuitive is valid. Unless his method includes rigorous "other wordly testing" I don't think it ought to be admissible as fact, only as speculation. This is why we have conflicting, incohrent occult theorization to begin with.
[QUOTE]Now this line of thinking crosses over into that pareidolia thread that you seem to have such an interest in. "Pareidolia" and "apophenia", like "hypnosis", are usually used (by those who actually know these words) as terms to dismiss these tendencies, i.e. "that's just pareidolia", like "oh, that's just hypnosis". These kinds of perceptions are never adequately explained; just given a name and banished. Magicians and artists (particularly the Surrealists, like Dali who called it paranoiac-critical activity) deliberately embrace and use these perceptual faculties as magical or artistic method, heightening the ability to perceive synchronous patterns in everything in order to build one's own magical mythopoeia (there's another silly alliterative for you).[/QUOTE]
Magical mythpoeia actually has a meaning. Typhonic teratoma is a hodgepodge of "cool sounding words" (or what appeared to be).
I would, however, argue the illegitimacy of taking appearances at face value, regardless of the reason. I can understand it as a tool for aesthetic reasons (which are not rational and not meant to be). But the occult is meant to be rational, real, and not merely aesthetic.
[quopte]If you're really wanting to discuss this stuff with us Cavalier you're more than welcome. But bring something to the table even if it's just some sincerity.[/QUOTE]
I'm always sincere. That is one thing you can accept from me.
Posted 26 December 2010 - 06:01 AM
Well first you have to understand what is implied by something being considered "Typhonian." Then you have to look into what is implied by "teratoma" in this regard, as in something alien that forces it's way into it's host. The title is taken from a chapter in Kenneth Grant's Nightside of Eden.
I've found the book of considerable occult value.
I now see that Cavalier has completely derailed this thread with it's nonsense and that it is an obvious contrarian which makes me wish I hadn't even replied in the first place. I also agree that it is completely insincere. The irritation has put me off, so I'll be back with more on some of my experiences with the techniques described in the booklet tomorrow.
Posted 11 May 2011 - 03:57 PM
I'm just curious about what you had planned on coming back "tomorrow" and posting here back in December... if you're still around. I saw that you were posting in a thread on this same subject on LAShTAL a few months ago as well.
EDIT: I just noticed that the current last post in that thread provides a link back to my thread here.
Posted 02 April 2015 - 03:46 AM
Is it now necessary to change the positions of the Genii and Qliphoth sigils in Liber 231 to accommodate for Crowley's alterations to the Tarot? Is it also necessary to rearrange the text/prose in the second section to match these changes as each line is meant to correspond with each pair of the entities?
Posted 02 April 2015 - 02:48 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users