Ceremonial Magick practices in Wicca and Witchcraft

[loona wynd]

The LBRP is in my mind, invocation into the circle. It's funny, our modern terminology has a gap. Evocation is generally into a scrying device, or outside the circle. Invocation is used for 2 things I consider different enough to need different terms, calling a thing into yourself, or calling into your sacred space.

As I learned it evocation is the process of calling a spirit to you while invocation is the process of calling the God or spirit into you. Both of them are forms of summoning magic in my view. One of them is ritual possession and the other is contact within the bounds of the ritual circle.

I do think that you are right there. It seems to me that the evocation into the circle should have a different name and or term. I don't know what else to call it though. Its slightly different from the evocation into a scrying device (as far as I can see) in regards to manifestation. When I evoke the spirits of the elements into my circle I see them there astrally so its an astral manifestation.

I do think that perhaps in the magic/magick forum we can have a discussion on the LBRP as that is a specific ritual. There is a lot of content there that can be discusses as well as its impact on witchcraft today. That's why at this point I'm thinking it should have its own thread. I believe that the LBRP is a part of a larger ritual as well I just haven't experienced that other ritual yet myself.

Konstantinos has a great book there actually, I use some if it myself. I wouldn't suggest even trying for a physical manifestation, mirror work is so much easier, and gives the same result. If you can scry, and you can call something, you can evoke into a mirror. I'd suggest replacing the Divine Names in whatever source you use with ones suited for you, of course

I can scry with fire and smoke. I've occasionally been able to scry with ponds or surfaces of water. Its easier for me to scry with a camp fire or something like that rather than with water or mirrors. I wonder if the same techniques could work with a bowl of water. A bowl of water is also a reflective surface. I don't know enough about it though. I havent really done much scrying in a while. I also have a crystal ball I want to try working with.

[-Dark-Moon-]

I always thought Konstantinos was kind of dark fluff by CM standards. Like, the Silverravenwolf of CM... Ie doesnt really contain any original ideas except for a few novel entities... Having said that, I own Nocturnal Magic and Summoning Spirits though, and did like the exercises in Summoning spirits.... It's extremely basic I guess and generally regarded as a beginner book.

[loona wynd]

I always thought Konstantinos was kind of dark fluff by CM standards. Like, the Silverravenwolf of CM... Ie doesnt really contain any original ideas except for a few novel entities... Having said that, I own Nocturnal Magic and Summoning Spirits though, and did like the exercises in Summoning spirits.... It's extremely basic I guess and generally regarded as a beginner book.

I never said it wasn't a beginner book. I've heard both good and bad things about Summoning spirits and the approach to evocation. Now that I have been adviced to at least give the exercises a try for myself I am going to reread and apply the exercises as best I can on my own.

I own Nocturnal Magic, Gothic Grimoire, Nocturnicon, and Summoning Spirits by him. I actually need to reread the Nocturnicon because I think I finally have a place where I can try one of the underworld rituals.....but thats for a different topic. I also always liked his concept about dark magic and the light and shadows in Nocturnal witchcraft. I like his style of writing but also felt that it was lacking a little something. There is nothing wrong with questioning or asking about an authors presentation of practices and skills in threads like this before trying them for yourself.

Now when it comes to the more detailed and indepth practices and works on ceremonial magic I do have some work. I believe I have on my kindle Waite's Ceremonial magic book. I have in hard copy his book on black magic. I also have a book on the Rituals of Thelema and a book that has Dion Fortunes writings on ceremonial/ritual magic.

I just haven't done a whole lot of practical application and in depth study. I sort of read the concepts curiously as interesting enough to have a basic idea of where the practice goes. No one has really been able to peak my interest in the Kabblah and Ceremonial aspect as more than a curiosity and different magical practice to have some base familiarity with until now.

[random417]

What I see the Summoning Spirits (which is the only one of his books I've read) to be is a decent grimoire. The sigils and such are the same as you'll find other places, but it's a collection of nothing but spirits that are easy to work with. It's kind of, um... baby's first grimoire if you will, or evocation for dummies. It's I think designed to be more approachable than the old classics on the subject.

Reading his descriptions also, they're a bit fluffy, but obviously from the point of view of someone who has encountered all the spirits he's writing about.

I think it's great mostly because beginners are likely to flip through whatever book they have looking for a spirit that appeals to them, or that rules over something they need. Not a good idea with some of the traditional texts.

[loona wynd]

What I see the Summoning Spirits (which is the only one of his books I've read) to be is a decent grimoire. The sigils and such are the same as you'll find other places, but it's a collection of nothing but spirits that are easy to work with. It's kind of, um... baby's first grimoire if you will, or evocation for dummies. It's I think designed to be more approachable than the old classics on the subject.

Considering the publishing company that is not a surprise. It also says early on in the book that it is designed to be a beginning book. So it does admit that. Do you think that there is any value in the information though?

Reading his descriptions also, they're a bit fluffy, but obviously from the point of view of someone who has encountered all the spirits he's writing about.

Do you think its decent enough to have an idea what spirit you are contacting?

I think it's great mostly because beginners are likely to flip through whatever book they have looking for a spirit that appeals to them, or that rules over something they need. Not a good idea with some of the traditional texts.

Well that is how most of Llwellyn's books work. They are designed for beginners. They are made easy to read and understand. I still think it might be useful for me to try some of the techniques though.

To get this back on topic again what would you recommended for a first text then?

[random417]

In some ways, his descriptions are more useful than the classic ones. Mostly because they're in language that's clear and concise. The entities in there that I've worked with personally, his descriptions come pretty close.

As far as a beginning book, he's also a bit fluffy in his own way, but towards the end of Modern Magick, by Donald Michael Craig (maybe Kraig, I don't remember off hand) he has a chapter on evocation. I'd suggest using the process outlined in there, but doing an angel of some sort. You can generate an appropriate symbol using the rose cross method in the same book.

I actually suggest that book as a good intro to CM. All it has is the basics, but it's decent for what it is

[loona wynd]

In some ways, his descriptions are more useful than the classic ones. Mostly because they're in language that's clear and concise. The entities in there that I've worked with personally, his descriptions come pretty close.

I'll keep that in mind. I personally believe that all authors have something of value to contribute to their fields. Its up to us as the reader to find out for us in our studies what that value is. I read it once very quickly in order to just see what sort of material it contained. Now I think I will look at it with new eyes.

As far as a beginning book, he's also a bit fluffy in his own way, but towards the end of Modern Magick, by Donald Michael Craig (maybe Kraig, I don't remember off hand) he has a chapter on evocation. I'd suggest using the process outlined in there, but doing an angel of some sort. You can generate an appropriate symbol using the rose cross method in the same book.

I actually have that book on my list of books for ceremonial magic. I think that it may be worth investing some time into getting a few books. Though my studies at the moment have been focused on more practical work, I am thinking of trying magic for spiritual work as well. So its a bit of a dual sword of what to study and work on now. I'm also being drawn to do my Shamanic work again as well. So choices choices.

I do need to redevelop my psychic skills. I'm having a hard time keeping visualizations lately. My focus hasn't been able to stay either. So I am going to try and fix that. I have some CD's and incense combinations that will help me work on strengthening those skills again. They are important skills to have when working any type of magic.

I am also thinking about applying to two different traditions for training. One I have started before and one that is new to me completely. I want to do both so I may work both as well. I know that they are both two different schools of thought on witchcraft and magic so that may be an advantage.

I've been invited to train with and try to join the local OTO order. I know a few people in the group. I just have transportation issues that I need to work with. I think when that gets settled I will look at joining them. When you are invited and keep going back to looking at the events and thinking I should be there or I need to experience that then it's time to get into it.

I actually suggest that book as a good intro to CM. All it has is the basics, but it's decent for what it is

That's good to know. I know that there are a lot of CM texts out there. I also know that like every other occult topic out there, the books are going to varry in quality and readability.

Now here is a question for you:

Do you make a distinction between ritual magic and ceremonial magic? If so what do you feel the real distinction is? What are the most CM elements you have found in Wicca?

[random417]

Ritual magick v. CM is kind of like our version of Witch v Wiccan lol. Ceremonial Magician is kind of the blanket term, and I have no problems being identified as such, but... Keeping in mind that you'll get as many different answers as cermonialists you ask, for me, true CM is defined as tracing back to our "modern roots" if you will of GD, OTO, our various Roscicrucian orders prevalent in the late 19th or early 20th century, or alternatively, work and groups rooted and based in medieval practices. Ritual magick makes heavy use of those some times, but draws on several sources instead of being inspired by one. It's a blurry line, kind of like how many "Witchcraft" groups could trace their lineage back to Gardner if they wanted. By my own definition, I'm a ritual magician, but the term hasn't caught on, so I don't really use it

[-Dark-Moon-]

If you join the OTO they make you sign a paper saying you only believe in Thelema.

Screwed that one up and tossed it in the rubbish. No offence to any OTO members here.

Loona in the meantime if you want to develop your psychic ability just get a crystal (a small piece of quartz with inclusions will do) and practice scrying for a few minutes each day. Alternatively are you practicing any forms of divination?

[loona wynd]

Ritual magick v. CM is kind of like our version of Witch v Wiccan lol.

Why did I have a feeling you were going to say that.

Ceremonial Magician is kind of the blanket term, and I have no problems being identified as such

That's how you have identified yourself here...

, but... Keeping in mind that you'll get as many different answers as cermonialists you ask,

Sounds like the same thing that happens when you ask a group of witches for the definition of a witch. Ask 11 witches get 13 or more different answers all legitimate.

for me, true CM is defined as tracing back to our "modern roots" if you will of GD, OTO, our various Roscicrucian orders prevalent in the late 19th or early 20th century, or alternatively, work and groups rooted and based in medieval practices.

That is along the lines of what I think of when I think of Ceremonial magic, I know that there are several books out there on the Golden Dawn. I also know they are not the only resource out there. I have a book that has influenced me that talks about and reveals some of the rituals of Thelema. I also know that these groups are very hierarchical and that it can take time and be difficult to rise in degree and ranks within the organizations.

Ritual magick makes heavy use of those some times, but draws on several sources instead of being inspired by one.

What do you think some of those common uses are?

It's a blurry line, kind of like how many "Witchcraft" groups could trace their lineage back to Gardner if they wanted.

True, but only those whose core rituals and practices basically remained intact would be considered true BTW by his standards. There are traditions out there which openly trace training to Gardner. That doesnt make them Wiccan though, Its the core rituals there that makes the difference. The traditions which trace to Gardner but have changed the core are valid mystery witchcraft traditions but are not Wicca.

By my own definition, I'm a ritual magician, but the term hasn't caught on, so I don't really use it

You could be the one to start it. Terms and concepts always start with one person who expands on it and tells others about it. They in turn may tell others about it and the term will grow. That is also how traditions spread. So you could be one to start a whole new "label" or philosophy in magic as it were.

[loona wynd]

If you join the OTO they make you sign a paper saying you only believe in Thelema.

I haven't seen that on any of the membership requirements and the like on lodge papers. I know a few OTO members that had at one point associations with traditional Wicca (not accepted in the BTW community though due to associations with oath breakers). About a year after I joined them for a ritual they disbanded to focus on their Thelema workings. So nothing worked there.

Screwed that one up and tossed it in the rubbish. No offence to any OTO members here.

I don't see how that would offend any one but that is me. You can't agree to believe in just that one path so you didn't sign it or agree to follow it. Thats not a bad thing.

Loona in the meantime if you want to develop your psychic ability just get a crystal (a small piece of quartz with inclusions will do) and practice scrying for a few minutes each day. Alternatively are you practicing any forms of divination?

I actually have several meditation and psychic development exercises to do that I need to get back into the habbit of doing. I'm going to be reapplying for training in the Temple tradition as well as in the Feri tradition. So with both I would be developing those skills. I have them I just need to get them strong again. Sort of like going back to a sport or activity you did years ago. You remember how to do it and the techniques involved your just not where you were when you did it all the time. Its that sort of thing.

I have a few pieces of quartz. I actually have a quartz crystal ball for scrying. iI've connected to quartz with my mind and my spirit in a very personal way. Quartz is special to me.

[random417]

What do you think some of those common uses are?

Theres enough of the Golden Dawn even in what non-ritual focused groups do that if you look hard at any group with a western approach, you'll find that. Things like the LBRP and Middle Pillar are so common as to be stereotypes. The problem isn't finding it, but rather deciding when it counts. The Golden Dawn had such a wide racing influence, and their fingers in so many pies...

The traditions which trace to Gardner but have changed the core are valid mystery witchcraft traditions.

Exactly, although the line is a little more blurred in the case of CM, as much of it is "reconstructed" as it were.

[-Dark-Moon-]

Sometimes I think it's a good idea to keep things as simple as possible for yourself ... If you practice one thing and try to master it, at least you have one thing that you can rely on that you are proficient in. Scrying with crystal, water, a black tv screen, whatever, does help you access that 'inner eye' a little easier. Wearing moonstone or labradorite might help too.

[loona wynd]

Theres enough of the Golden Dawn even in what non-ritual focused groups do that if you look hard at any group with a western approach, you'll find that.

Can you think of some examples?

Things like the LBRP and Middle Pillar are so common as to be stereotypes.

I love the LBRP. The words just sort come out as a song when I do it. There is a thread on it and personal experiences with it in the ritual/spell forum. They are also the most well known rituals in ceremonial magic and magic in general.

The problem isn't finding it, but rather deciding when it counts. The Golden Dawn had such a wide racing influence, and their fingers in so many pies...

So can you expand a bit on what you mean about deciding when it counts?

Exactly, although the line is a little more blurred in the case of CM, as much of it is "reconstructed" as it were.

I know some lodges have strict charter based establishments for their traditions and styles. I'm not sure if this is the case for all style and traditions of ceremonial magic.

What about solitary practice of ceremonial magic?

[-Dark-Moon-]

Agreed that LBRP and middle pillar are almost sterotypes. The LBRP is less of a banishing ritual but more about a gaining of consciousness. If you're concerned with banishing anything then I like the Star Ruby. You don't have to be a member of an order to practice ceremonial magic. In fact, many people practice in a solitary fashion.