terça-feira, 28 de dezembro de 2010

The Vision of the Holy Guardian Angel (Aleister Crowley)

There is a very finite limit to which the energy consciously generated and directed by our own ego can effect Magick. There is, however, a deeper, greater, infinite energy, which is not limited by our own limitations. The beginning of a full opening of ourselves as vehicles for the work of this energy, of the recognition of this energy as a greater form of our own Self, of a dramatic influx of this energy, is called the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. Knowledge and Conversation is the primary attainment of the Thelemic system, associated with the Sephirah Tiphareth.
There are innumerable models for describing this process. The previous paragraph involved one of mine. Only some of these models will be useful to an individual magician in their attempt to achieve the actual experience that these models attempt to describe. The relationship to the Angel is personal for each individual, and the specific method of invoking the Angel will also be personal to each individual.
In column XLV of Crowley's 777 there is a list of Magical Powers and Mystical States associated with the 32 categories of Kabbalah.[1] The Powers are assigned to each of the 22 paths between the Sephiroth, and the States to the Sephiroth themselves. The States, or Visions, are keyed to the kinds of experiences that might be had by one attuned to the level of consciousness of that Sephirah in virtue of holding the corresponding grade in A∴A∴. The Mystical State associated with Malkuth is 'The Vision of the Holy Guardian Angel'. Every magician, regardless of their engagement or lack thereof with the A∴A∴ system, can be understood as being in Malkuth by the parameters of the system. It follows from this that every magician is entitled to receive this Vision in some form or another consonant with their True Will.
The Vision of the Holy Guardian Angel occurring in Malkuth is clearly distinct from the Knowledge and Conversation of the Angel in Tiphareth, but in what way? Crowley very rarely mentions the Vision, and never clearly defines it. My own definition, as used in this book, is that the Vision of the Holy Guardian Angel is any experience of the Angel that falls short of Samadhi — Samadhi being distinctive of the Briatic breakthrough disclosing Tiphareth. The awareness of and relationship to the Angel is progressive. It reaches a distinctive stage of intensity in the Adept, but awareness of the presence of the Angel can occur to the initiate as well. This is the Vision of the Holy Guardian Angel. It can (and will) occur spontaneously by the grace of the Angel itself, but it is also appropriate to invoke it. Indeed, it is the natural right of the magician to do so, though their results will necessarily depend upon their own ripeness to receive them. All of the practices in this book preceding this chapter are intended to act to so ripen the magician.
Just as with Knowledge and Conversation, the means to obtain the Vision of the Angel is a lock that each initiate must find their own key to open. Nevertheless, there are traditional methods that may be of value. The major ritual within the Thelemic tradition for the invocation of the Angel isLiber Samekh.[2] This ritual may be appropriate for the accomplishment of the Vision. In the spirit of that possibility, therefore, this chapter will provide a commentary on this ritual, followed by an outline of one possible magical working using Liber Samekh to invoke the Vision of the Holy Guardian Angel. As with anything directly involving the Angel, this commentary and the appended working outline can only be suggestive, nor is the working even necessarily recommended.
The following text of Liber Samekh is a composite version prepared by the author for the purposes of this chapter. It is primarily based on an earlier version of the spell included in Crowley's 1904 publication of the Goetia. Omitted here is Crowley's own lengthy commentary, as well as his Kabbalistic analysis of the Barbarous Names of Evocation. While important, Crowley's commentary is aimed at an Adepts level of engagement with the ritual, whereas this chapter attempts only to provide a more general symbolic description. I highly recommend Crowley's discussion of the use of Liber Samekh by the Adeptus Minor, but refer the interested reader to the full presentation of this text in Magick in Theory and Practice.