The Star of Azazel - Azazelin Tähti

What is you experience and/or opinion on Enochiana as a magical system? By Enochiana is ment the magical system introduced by Dr. John Dee and his scryer Edward Kelley in the 16th century.

It has been a defining force in modern occultism (Golden Dawn, Thelema) and modern satanismi (Church of Satan, Temple of Set). There are both purist schools and innovators (Enochian Tarot, for example) of Enochiana, and there are also those who reccommend abstaining from it althogether (Paul Foster Case).

Everyone seems to agree, however, that it is terrible effective and unusually risky form of magic.

I remember reading the Satanic Bible in my teens somewhere between 16 and 17 and most of Lavey's ideas never rang any real bell in me - I was more of a Nietszhean pagan-satanist until I started reading Blavatsky and Nefastos in 2003 - and I remember that his descriptions of Enochian magic didn't really cause anything but skeptic bewilderment back then. The same thing can be said about Crowley's 'The Vision and the Voice' that I read shortly afterwards. So I can't say that I know much about the whole system anything that it dealt with angels and demons. Can you explain the basics?

Boreas wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 2:30 pm Can you explain the basics?

I doubt that I could outdo Wikipedia in explaining the basics.

I, too, first came across Enochiana in The Satanic Bible. Unlike you, I did find it the most interesting section of the book. Of course in the original texts, there is no mention of Satan or Hell, these being LaVey's innovations. I am not an enthusiast of Enochiana, but I have taken an interest in the more thourough studies on the subject that have been published more recently. I supposed I have too much purist leanings to really enjoy LaVey's innovations. But If I was presented with the Enochian calls from the Satanic Bible for the first time without knowing their background, I would certainly be impressed with them.

Much more interesting was the Vision and the Voice. I find it to be a magnificently poetic whole. It is one of my favourites from Crowley. It is just so solidified into Thelemic theology, that it can be difficult to enjoy it as other than that.

obnoxion wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 12:53 pm

Boreas wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 2:30 pm Can you explain the basics?

I doubt that I could outdo Wikipedia in explaining the basics.

Ok. I checked the wiki article. It seems the demonic inversion is Lavey's own making (profanation?).

Boreas wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 1:39 pm It seems the demonic inversion is Lavey's own making (profanation?).

Yes. I've understood he didn't much believe in the angelic origin of the texts nor the language, but felt the Calls impressive when spoken outloud. Later, during the crisis of the Church of Satan in 1975, Michael Aquino went to some trouble in researching the original texts, and used two of them in their original form. And this led to him receiving The Book of Coming Forth by Night, which was the beginning of The Temple of Set.

obnoxion wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 1:53 pm What is you experience and/or opinion on Enochiana as a magical system? By Enochiana is ment the magical system introduced by Dr. John Dee and his scryer Edward Kelley in the 16th century.

I have been fascinated by this line of work for many years now. However, I have (unfortunately) seen what it can do to people who go on unprepared, so a serious study is needed. What have been written by Dee himself is very cryptic and hard to decipher. I would recommend, though, thelemic authors, such an Lon Milo Duquette, who have written on the subject more plainly. His book Enochian vision magic is a must for every Enochiana scholar. Also, as a historical reference if no other, I would recommend Crowley's The Vision and the Voice, which is kind of a thelemic Book of revelations. It is, however, a perfect example of the system put to work.

As you most likely know, Dee was more of a rational minded person, whereas Kelley was his Seer, inclined to the astral influence. This has been my problem, since I am of the afore-mentioned mind set and would need someone of the latter to be able to work proficiently. But the concept itself is highly interesting, and, as recorded on numerous occasions, effective.

I've only barely skimmed the surface of Enochian magic, but for some reason I have always had a kind of adverse reaction to the thought of it. Perhaps it's the parallels I see between Edward Kelley and Joseph Smith and my personal distaste for mormonism interfering with coming at it from a more logical lens. But with that logic, I should have the same reaction to anyone who claims to be a seer. I think I will just hunker down one of these days and give it a good and thorough study.