776½: Tables for Practical Ceremonial

panpiper

Not inside information but the original notice is at <link removed by moderator>

This is a product of Jim Eshelman and the College of Thelema www.thelema.org
 

Aeon418

Has anyone snagged a copy yet?
 

Grigori

Not yet, I'm really eager to hear how it compares to Skinner's 'Magician's Tables'. I would guess it has a more GD/Thelemic flavor, as Skinner dropped some of that in preference of other/older material.
 

panpiper

I've had it for about a week now. The main advantages are the tables are LARGE and well laid out, which makes this easier to use than 777, there is some original material (added pantheons), some correction of Hebrew typography. Especially useful are the essay on ritual construction and the 10 sample rituals (even though I have issues with some of the basic assumptions).
 

Aeon418

panpiper said:
(even though I have issues with some of the basic assumptions).
Such as?
 

panpiper

Aeon418 said:

The insistence that even after deciding that the purpose of your ritual is congruous with your True Will, you need to spend even more time making sure that said purpose is "nonviolative" of someone else's will. This is a major philosophic issue with me, the lowering of Will from what should be the place of preeminence.

On a more technical subject: that flat assertion that the planetary hours have no validity.

That said it's a useful book & I've already gotten my money's worth out of it.
 

ravenest

panpiper said:
The insistence that even after deciding that the purpose of your ritual is congruous with your True Will, you need to spend even more time making sure that said purpose is "nonviolative" of someone else's will. This is a major philosophic issue with me, the lowering of Will from what should be the place of preeminence.

How strange! "someone else's will" in this context would have to be considered as; EVERYone elses will, wouldnt it? I mean, are they just suggesting not to be in conflict with those you know or care about? If not, it must be read as everyone else's will.

Maybe I dont understand the sense that 'nonviolative' was used? Was this author purporting to be a Thelemite?

Reminds me of the Wiccan 'Do what thou wilt but harm none' : so, the insane crack addict breaks into your home and wants to rape your children ... ?

I'd suggest people dont make up or modify philosophies (usually for OTHERS instruction :rolleyes: ) they cant really live up to.
 

Aeon418

panpiper said:
The insistence that even after deciding that the purpose of your ritual is congruous with your True Will, you need to spend even more time making sure that said purpose is "nonviolative" of someone else's will. This is a major philosophic issue with me, the lowering of Will from what should be the place of preeminence.
Yes, I agree that does sound a bit odd. But I can see how it would be useful at lower levels of initiation. Below the level of K&C the Will is very intuitive. In the same way that you can see what you want to see in a Tarot reading, the ego can get in the way of the True Will. A system of checks and balances to counter the possible influence of ego distortion may not be a bad thing at lower levels of initiation.

It's a bit like some of Crowley's stuff. He makes it very clear that the Adept 5=6 needs no external guidance. But below that level it is very different. If you take a look at the bottom of the totem pole, the OTO instructions, you find that Crowley was very clear and precise. Offering lots of guidance on the nature and lawful expression of the Will. At such low levels the dividing line between Will and Want is often very blurred, and a framework is needed to stop people from getting it badly wrong.

Obviously I haven't read the book yet, but from your description it sounds like Jim Eshelman is providing that kind of safety net.
 

Grigori

Aeon418 said:
But I can see how it would be useful at lower levels of initiation.

Maybe it's a warning...

Liber Oz said:
5. Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights.

Better make sure you're not messing with my Will or else I'll cut you up ***** :D