An interesting Left Hand Path episode from Black Flame Immersion’s podcast is now available. It is called Further, and I link to it below.
In this episode the host and co-host discuss the nature of experience and phenomenon. Specifically they discuss the difference between the dead and the greater spiritual entities (referred to by the host as “the others.”)
Check it out below:
I enjoyed the fact that the host is adding in his poetic work again. I think there is a depth to it that really adds to each episode.
The host also defines Diabolism a bit more in this episode, early on.
The concept of communion with the dead is brought up as the most common misunderstanding of greater spiritual communion (i.e. someone thinks they are speaking to a deity but instead have been interacting with a dead person.)
What’s the point in speaking to the dead? Outside of reaching out to a lost loved one, there’s no spiritual gain, unless a person has a path that is ancestral in work (Vodun, Shamantic, etc.)
Using Barriers comes up at 2:12:00.
The host’s ideas on circles and protection come up at 2:33:33.
I liked what the host had to say about not using protection circles, as in Solomonic and general modern magic methodologies. My first introduction to Magic was in the early 90’s on my own, using Donald Michael Kraig’s work “Modern Magick” which made use of the Lesser Banishing Ritual of the Pentagram and other Golden Dawn derivations of protection (like the Greater Banishing of the Hexagram.)
At that time I knew nothing of the Golden Dawn. I was in college and on my own spiritually. In time I joined various occult orders… this came at a time when I was isolated and on my own. I joined a Golden Dawn group and was trained in that system. I used the LBRP, BRH, etc. for many years.
In time I had a mentor of Enochian magic and she didn’t use protective circles. That was a shock to me. Her source material for that was the “Sacred Magic of Abramelin the Mage.” Her advice was simply, “try doing the work without circles and see if it’s any different.”
I felt that circles were adversarial. Removing them I felt I was more in alignment with the goal.
I also like what the host had to say about books being another’s path…. This is a good point… and I think it feels like that to me as well. I also sought an individual path in my spiritual quest. Books are fine, as long as they aren’t taken as stereo instructions. I must admit, however, that I sought the stereo instructions… I sought the person in authority who told me exactly what to do… but in time that burned off. I realized that I was following someone else’s path.
In my opinion, that doesn’t mean that books are wrong to read or follow, but the work must be personalized. As an example, I enjoyed the work of Don Webb, “Uncle Setnakts Essential Guide to the Left Hand Path.” In his “grand initiation,” in that work, he has a 55 day ritual. I was inspired in his first day’s work – which correlated to the host’s view on removing the old parasites. I took Don Webb’s first day approach to burn out the old ways, modified it for myself… and dismissed the rest of the ritual, in favor of my own emotional inspiration.
That emotional inspiration is a key factor of the host’s discussion here. I agree completely. I think of the various forms of Shamanism that anthropologists have discussed. These paths weren’t so much about “do this exactly as I do it,” but with the motivation guiding the act of the work.
Nature of Phenomenon
I am a theist, and as such I do believe in the power of spiritual phenomenon and such. I don’t see that, as I find it a distraction these days… but like the host I’ve had my share of experiences in the physical frame of reality.
However, I don’t necessarily think this is “the dead,” but to me, I think this relates to one’s own energy. I see a person as having at least two states. One state is the physical body consciousness, and the other states are levels of awareness expanded beyond the body.
When someone has a program in their mind (i.e. “using a Ouija board summons demons”) then such a person has negative experiences using the board. In college I ran a small experiment where I had people use Ouija boards and we had things come through – sometimes revealing a friend not present was crying, later confirmed… but negative experiences were had as well. So I replaced that Ouija board with another talking board… this one painted in lavender and flowers printed on it… it was like a child’s happy smurf type of a talking board. The same people using it, no longer had the negative manifestation.
Prior to Ouija boards, people used newsprint with upturned wine goblets. What makes the newspaper an occult tool? Intent.
I’ve come to the opinion that an eye chart or an English alphabet chart is not thought of as “occult” and that programs the experience. Through in the historical feelings on a talking board (especially a Ouija board) and the same people will have severe responses… but in reality, what makes an Ouija board different than a chart of the English Alphabet? Intent.
Intent programs the body consciousness and somehow inspires the greater aspects of self to create an effect. The scratches one might get… could very well be one’s own self manifesting it. A can flying across the kitchen, could very well be someone’s own energy manifesting as they are programming the experience.
In many cases that I read about, haunted houses are really haunted people… young teenagers going through hard situations with school. Angry, frustrated and pissed off… then they move to a new house and phenomenon starts. Is it the house? Or is it the person?
I’m not saying that the dead don’t interact, but in my experience a person’s power to create seemingly external phenomenon is quite real.
The Religious Experience
I wrote about this in another post, but this year I looked back on my whole history of spiritual practice. Throughout most of the religions I belonged to: Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Scientology and a variety of occult schools, I felt this presence I thought was the Presence of God.
It didn’t make sense with Buddhism, because it had no idea of God, but I felt that presence there as well. I assumed there was One God behind all faith. But in 2019 my views changed.
I re-evaluated this and came to a new conclusion…. what I was feeling in each religion was not something external, but rather something I brought to the experience. I was sensing me. That’s why it was always the same. I wasn’t tuning into the same God, but tuning into the same expansive form of myself.
That’s my gnosis, and perhaps others will not share it.
There are spirits of the dead. There are also greater spiritual entities. I believe I have connected to both. But there is also a third option, and that is the self expressing itself through some form of mental/conscious energy.
Consider how Christian missionaries go to Asia and tell stories of Buddhist temples with “demon possessed instruments playing by themselves.” I heard such a missionary as a child. Yet today, no common/secular person would have such an experience. How is it the Christian seems to have all these profound negative experiences of evil?
Because they expect evil. They program their own consciousness with that expectation. That expectation is made manifest, in my opinion, through the power of their expanded self.
Otherwise, why don’t we all share in that experience?
It’s hard for an Atheist to have a profound experience, because they shut out all of that potential. The expanded self of an atheist is disconnected to their conscious self.
Easy vs. Real
I do agree with the host that the dead is the easiest thing to access. People operate there because it’s quick and easy. However, does it offer anything real to the spiritual aspirant?
What’s easy, is limited. The gain on what takes time and effort is enriching.
In the golden dawn we never sought the dead… nor in other occult groups… we always thought, “what could that offer us?” But in the run of the mill occultism for fun and profit, comes the idea of pulling out a Ouija board and going at it. Or holding a seance…. sadly for many that is the pinnacle of occultism, when it is barely occultism at all.