What kinda shit can I do with Evola's magic? Can I at least get a gf?

>>24506432 (OP)
you can go insane or become incredibly successful. results may vary.

you can become a faggot and get dick from the whitest most aryan bulls on twitter, imagine their sloppy cocks violating your fertile urethra, the grecoroman tradition

>>24506432 (OP)
Nobody who reads Evola will ever get a girlfriend.

>>24506440
Evola threads sure do bring out the hedonist seethe
>>24506440
Wasn’t an issue for me

>>24506466
>>24506440
chthonic feminized dionysian lunar plebs

You can ride the tiger

>>24506432 (OP)
I have only read the book partway but I haven't encountered any woman attraction magic. Mostly it has been stuff about improving your own faculties. For love spells, you may wish to look into older types of coercive magic. Or you can just go get a haircut and have sex, incel.
>>24506553
Trvke.

>>24506553
babble, go bottom for a pedophile

>>24506553
screencapped

It should be noted that Reghini, who was a member of Ur's group (the best imo he is underrated), expressly said that all real magic (apart from so-called "natural" magic which is not really magic) was doomed to failure, which contradicts the words of most of the other members of Ur.
Reghini writes in his book about Agrippa, quoting one of his letters:
“La chiave di tutta la faccenda la riservo a me ed agli amici [...]. Sarebbe a crime and a public sacrilege that happens to all the coscienza of all. Poiché essa non si trasmette (traditur) con gli scritti, ma allo spirito per mezzo dello spirito si infonde (sed spiritui per spiritum infunditur)”.
in English: "The key to the whole affair I reserve for myself and for my friends [...]. It would be a crime and a sacrilege to publish this affair to the conscience of all. For it is not transmitted (traditur) through writings, but is infused (infunditur) into the spirit by means of the spirit."

>>24506466
I have a gf. I've had two gfs in the last 2 years. My most recent gf I got 3 months agter breaking up with my ex.

>>24506553
Kek you owned them

>>24507504
Natural magic is like 90% of magic though. In fact, even other magical methods which rely on willpower, attention and life force directly probably fall under natural magic (since our ability to use them was also generated by nature).
Agrippa is also not that much of a special or complex text. If you have slightly above average IQ and are not a constitutional hylic, you will discover "the key" yourself with sufficient study.

Magic doesn't work. Summoning demons doesn't work. Because it's all fake. I should know because I tried to summon a succubus and literally nothing ever happened, ever.

>>24508037
>rejected by a literal sex demon

I'd kms

>>24508052
You should

>>24508052
They don't exist

>>24506432 (OP)
You can cure your medical ailments like your arthritis by eliminating the magician responsible for it.

If you want to study magic you need at minimal a strong grasp on math, theology, neuroscience and philosophy.
Oh and this doesn't include all the secondary/tertiary research or the living experience which is required.

Good luck

>>24506432 (OP)
>For when I got in touch with Guénon after the war, and informed him of my accident (in the secret hope that Guénon might help me to 'understand' the event), I was asked whether I suspected that someone might have acted against me by occult means. Guénon added that he himself had been confined to his bed for several months, apparently on account of arthritis, but actually as a consequence of an outside attack; and that he had recovered from his illness once the person responsible had been discovered and neutralized. I told Guénon that a similar attack would be an unlikely cause in my case, not least because an extraordinarily powerful spell would have been necessary to cause such damage: for the spell would have had to determine a whole series of objective events, including the occurrence of the bombing raid, and the time and place in which the bombs were dropped. It is interesting to note that when I questioned Guénon concerning his accident

>>24506553
>jordan peterson posts on /lit/

>>24506553

>>24508037
>fails
>blames everything else
A woman moment.

I've read the book
>Go without eating
>Go outside of your corporeal body
>Communicate with spirits
>Vampirism (drain energy from others)
>Render your corporeal body impervious to harm
>Communicate without speaking

I guess those are the most flashy and noteworthy things I recall right now.

I magic'd in my pants one time.

>>24506432 (OP)
I tried reading that, incredibly hard to read, about as hard as Dialectic of Enlightenment by Adorno and Horkheimer which I have too. I gave up. But it's mostly just lack of motivation. If I had the motivation I might get through it. Anyway if I remember correctly he says at the outset that magic is not casting spells and stuff, it's basically a process of self realization or whatever, becoming who you really are, that kind of stuff. No quick fixes, just a long gradual arduous process of self-attainment/self-improvement.

>>24508122
Try again. It's not hard to read. Look up stuff that you don't understand. And if you think that's hard, try Evolas book on the Hermetic Art, that filters me. He straight up assumes that you know Greek, Latin, English and Italian, not to mention Alchemical symbols.

This is true. I was the gf.

>>24508037
skill issue
>>24508068
fact checked by real guenonian traditionalists
>>24508076
>math, theology, neuroscience and philosophy.
you can safely eliminated the first and the third items on your list. actually, you can probably eliminate all four. but the remaining two would help.
>>24508125
if you got filtered by the Hermetic Tradition you definitely got filtered by parts of Intro to Magic and didn't even realise it.

>>24508223
>fact checked

Nah, I just looked up the original letter it's from myself because I wanted to post the actual stupidity again.

>>24508223
>if you got filtered by the Hermetic Tradition you definitely got filtered by parts of Intro to Magic and didn't even realise it.

lol definitely. Getting filtered without realizing it is probably something that happens a lot

>>24508238
it's a meme, you 20 yo boomer

>>24507509
Post her nudes or it didn't happen.

>>24507997
For Reghini, the key is precisely initiation. He bases this interpretation on a number of letters from Agrippa, where, for example, Agrippa very clearly tells one of his disciples, Padre Aurelio da Acquapendente, that he must be physically present to transmit it to him through a few sacred words. However, transmitting spiritual influence through a simple ritual (or even a set of words) is nothing other than initiation.
In any case, I am very interested to hear what the "key" is for you, and even more so what you have been able to achieve from this key.

>>24507658

I always wonder what people mean by the word "nature" and "natural". Like how does "natural magic" make any sense to you? And what would be an example of un-natural magic?

Same kind of goes for "natural law" but that's sort of outside the scope of this thread.

>>24508431
I don't think initiation is necessary for magic at all, it's why magic involves so many laborious rituals.
Believe it or not I can't talk about the exact magic I practice without doxxing myself. But Agrippa practiced it too, is all I can say.
The key to magic is having an intuitive grasp of how magic works. Memorising rules and correspondences and applying them will work, but having a good sense for what's connected to what and why, and how to connect things in your own practice, will be very helpful.
Initiation is something quite different and even the most watered down definition of it is unnecessary for a lot of magical works. Goetic magic for example does not need initiation in any form. Most forms of ceremonial magic do not. It is also unnecessary for using physical objects that possess various magical virtues, or for divination, or for spells (like in the PGM). It's not even necessary for ESP or "astral projection" t b h.
What initiation does is impart knowledge and power immediately and directly, it helps develop various abilities quickly and safely, and also in the case of true and complete initiation, it begins or contributes to the development of the "Great Work", that is, spiritual immortality. But that's a far greater task than divining whether you will inherit your aunt's penthouse or using magic to be healthier or more popular. This type of stuff can be done without receiving initiation from anyone, so long as you have done your homework.
>>24508469
In my view, all things that exist are a part of created, generated nature. So it's hard for me to draw a distinction. Maybe a rigorous definition can be found in the traditional authors. I think this term is probably a historical legacy of Christianity - "natural magic", as in magic that operates as a part of nature according to the divine will and is therefore permissible to practice, in contrast to magic that works by conjuring demons, like Goetic magic for example. I would say that even demons are a part of nature, since they were made by God. But there is probably some highly specific difference according to the history of Christian thought.
I certainly don't think Reghini was referring to the Ars Goetia though. I don't know what he meant when he used that term.

>What kinda shit can I do with Evola's magic?
You can put on your white robe and matching shoes and go in the basement and do your chants while standing in the pentagram drawn on the floor. Make sure to face east. i’m not making a joke btw there’s a chapter about this in volume 1

If you practice magic you will be damned.

>>24508720
You mean like turning a staff into a serpent, or walking on water?

>>24508037
>an Hylic attempts

>>24508741
>Casually commits the unforgivable sin
Yikes.

>>24506432 (OP)
>Can I at least get a gf?
Yeah, just have some basic social skills (something many Evolians on this board fail at). Maybe don't actively mention the man himself on a first date, optics are absolute dogshit from a woman's perspective because his wikipedia page immediately calls him a fascist misogynist with ties to Nazi Germany, but I've chatted with girls about adjacent shit like Guenon and the Kali Yuga on first dates and they went fine lol. Anyway, it's interesting stuff but it's only useful if you have a grounding in meditation or similar practices to begin with, and you need to keep in mind that the UR Group was not infallible and was interpreting shit through their own lens to suit their specific narrative (e.g. the chapter asserting that Gichtel's famous pic of "the regenerated man" is a Christian mystic equivalent of chakras)

>>24506553
Northern solarpilled post

it's funny to me how philosophy, which was all about rigorous logic and refutation and concrete facts in the days of the ancient, has evolved into bunch of fucking bullshit about spirits and voodoo in the so called age of technology and enlightenment.

>>24508865
Philosophy and occultism are two different traditions, even if they cross paths imo.

>>24508865
It's only funny to you because you presuppose a materialist ontology and epistemology that rule out alternative views pre-emptively. Actually there is nothing strange about giving an extremely rigorous and exhaustive account of all things, and not just the material things that any old monkey can see and touch, and indeed such accounts were written. If you had read any ancient philosophy you would know that this is why people bothered to reason not only about the gods and spirits, but also about the invisible physical and mathematical laws. Presumably during your reading you could have also picked up the awareness that rigorous logical reasoning is a very different thing from the iterative application of the experimental method which became predominant in modernity.

>>24506432 (OP)
>if magic
>then metaphysics
>if metaphysics.
>then God
>if God
>then why appeal to magic instead of God?
anything but God with you people, right?
jeez...

>>24508976
Because God isn't your private jannie. His job isn't to clean up your life and give you all the things you ask from him.

>>24508976
They touch on this in the book btw so this post is proof you haven't read the book. I get annoyed when niggers who haven't read the book go in the thread and shit up the thread with shitposts such as this one, the only thing you're doing is proving you haven't read it and basically that you are ignorant.

>>24508616
>In my view, all things that exist are a part of created, generated nature. So it's hard for me to draw a distinction. Maybe a rigorous definition can be found in the traditional authors. I think this term is probably a historical legacy of Christianity - "natural magic", as in magic that operates as a part of nature according to the divine will and is therefore permissible to practice, in contrast to magic that works by conjuring demons, like Goetic magic for example.


Ok I can see your point now (kind of), But I think that you and others who harbor this view have applied a moral lense to it. In the sense that you want to make out one form of magic to be bad / morally negative / evil by postulating that that particular form of magic works through conjuring what you call "demons", because you and / or others who hold this view take "demons" to be morally bad / evil / negative entities.
Right now I believe that there are 3 forms of magic, one that works through the power of God, one that works through the angels of God and one type that works by calling on the spirits of the dead. I'm obviously not a practitioner of magic though but that's what I picked up from a different book I was reading.

>>24508616
>Initiation is something quite different and even the most watered down definition of it is unnecessary for a lot of magical works.

Obviously, natural and celestial magic (to a certain extent) does not need initiation, grandmothers in the Romanian countryside practice natural magic all the time, you can't even really call it magic.

>Goetic magic for example does not need initiation in any form. Most forms of ceremonial magic do not.

I'm not sure, most of the testimonies of those who practice goetia are quite disappointing, I have never met anyone who has been able to manifest a spirit in full form, most just speak of hearing voices or the flame of a candle that behaves strangely. It is quite possible that Solomonic magic requires an initiation (given the priestly nature of ceremonial magic in the West), an initiation that very few have these days.

>It is also unnecessary for using physical objects that possess various magical virtues, or for divination, or for spells (like in the PGM). It's not even necessary for ESP or "astral projection" t b h.

I disagree, even in the PGM it is stated in several places that one must be pleasing to the gods to have any effect, and again the PGM were practiced by priests who received extensive training in these things

>What initiation does is impart knowledge and power immediately and directly, it helps develop various abilities quickly and safely, and also in the case of true and complete initiation, it begins or contributes to the development of the "Great Work", that is, spiritual immortality.

Yes, but I think there is there are three problems:
The first is that the person is left to their own devices, having no master.
The second, a consequence of the first, is that the person is therefore, as I have often seen, prey to lower influences (not necessarily demons, but sometimes simply the Freudian unconscious), which they could mistake for higher influences.
Third, the person must establish communication with higher principles on their own. In Chinese magic, it is said that upon being initiated, one is immediately protected by the gods and ancestors of the lineage. On the other hand, a person who does not have this initiation must pray to Lao Zi, and it is a matter of luck to get results.
Ultimately this reflects my contingent opinion, having practiced celestial magic for less than a year without much success and having seen that failure in this domain was the norm.

>>24506432 (OP)
>Can I get a gf reading the most pussy drying author in existence?
This place, man...

>can I get a gf by becoming even more chvddie
anon I

>>24509052
>he doesn't know about the witchy e-girl Evola controversy
Evola had books published by Inner Traditions, which definitively puts him in the pussy moistening camp.

>>24509017
>But I think that you and others who harbor this view have applied a moral lense to it
I have not, as I stated, I think this term is a consequence of Christian culture. In my view, all magic that occurs within nature (i.e. all magic in general) would be natural.
>Right now I believe that there are 3 forms of magic, one that works through the power of God, one that works through the angels of God and one type that works by calling on the spirits of the dead. I'm obviously not a practitioner of magic though but that's what I picked up from a different book I was reading.
Well, in addition to those, you can also definitely conjure demons and evil spirits. It's been done. It's what Goetia is about. It's not my job to stop people who want to use this type of magic either, so I don't really care about it. Although I don't exactly recommend it either. Same goes for necromancy.
Beyond this, there is also a form of magic that uses the powers of the cosmos, and even a form of magic that uses the powers of the human body. There may also be other types.
>>24509039
What is the real magic that you acknowledge, then, if natural and even celestial are not much in your eyes?
>I have never met anyone who has been able to manifest a spirit in full form
Why should that be the requirement? You don't need to see the mailman for him to deliver your mail. Those who wish to see the Goetic demons specifically train visualisation skills, scrying, or use appropriate tools to perceive them. But I don't know why anyone would want to see a demon in person.
That most Goetic mages are LARPers of course goes without saying, but that's a separate issue from what you said.
I also don't see what would make black magic like the Goetia priestly or initiatic.
>PGM
It mentions initiation occasionally, sure, but go look for testimonies and you will see plenty of folks using the rituals without being initiated. It is more about being tuned into the occult, rather than having the superhuman qualities of an initiate.
You are correct that a masterless path is not easy, but it can be trodden successfully. Half a year is not a long time to be doing magic. Take heart. What were you attempting?
Also, nice Bonatti.
Kind of weird just how many celestial mages I run into recently. You are like the 5th one this week.

>>24509651
>Why should that be the requirement? You don't need to see the mailman for him to deliver your mail. Those who wish to see the Goetic demons specifically train visualisation skills, scrying, or use appropriate tools to perceive them. But I don't know why anyone would want to see a demon in person.

Because seeing the entire form of the invoked spirit has always been considered the ultimate, for Goetians in general the more the manifestation appears to be sensible (vision, smell etc.) the more the invocation is considered successful. Which is understandable, moreover, in many cases the signs of manifestation are simply products of the imagination.

>I also don't see what would make black magic like the Goetia priestly or initiatic.

According to most researchers on the subject, Goetia was practiced mainly by priests/sacerdotes. There are also good reasons to believe that this is a universal fact, as traditional magic is mainly practiced by spiritual initiates (Sufis, Taoists, tantrikas, etc.), and there is no purely magical tradition. It is also clear, and a consensus, that the PGM were written by priests.

>It mentions initiation occasionally, sure, but go look for testimonies and you will see plenty of folks using the rituals without being initiated

There are many things left unsaid in the PGMs; the PGMs are primarily memos and do not form a complete manual.
Here again, every time I was able to discuss with someone, I quickly realized that these "results" were not very impressive. Even more so, most of the practitioners, even PGM (like Rufus Opus), seem to me to be cruelly lacking - I may seem immature - "esoteric aura" or "spiritual aura" for lack of a better term. It seems quite obvious that magic has never been practiced by normies, that it is the prerogative of an intellectual and spiritual elite, this is a point on which Agrippa insists a lot. The fact that these people (R.O and co included) visibly have no interest in spirituality (i.e. the higher states of being beyond the common mire) is problematic.

You say you practice the same magic as Agrippa, can you elaborate on that? Since the fourth book isn't by Agrippa, I don't know if we can establish a ceremonial practice from the first three books.

>>24509772
What major texts do you read concerning magic, also do you study Alchemy at all

>>24509975
>do you study Alchemy at all
No, not really

Magic not useful. I think it can make people go crazy. Would not bother with it. Be kind to each other.

>>24508107
So just be anorexic, schizophrenic, have Mpd, be gay, drive a Chevy Suburban, and refuse to talk to anyone? Is this what raw power looks like?

>>24510003
I feel like you're the caveman smashing two rocks together, refusing to make fire like the neighbouring tribe, shaking your head at their antics saying fire "makes people go crazy".

>>24509772
>Because seeing the entire form of the invoked spirit has always been considered the ultimate
This is not in the grimoires. Reference is made to the spirits "appearing" and also to possible visual manifestations, but this is not strictly necessary. Also, even in the grimoires tools for this are frequently mentioned. I can't remember the exact material right now (I don't do Goetia) but the use of crystals or glass is suggested as one way to perceive spirits. Other spells do not involve any direct contact with the spirit at all, instead receiving the information in a dream. Or even involve using a child to see the spirits for you (a rather unsavoury practice IMO). You can find similar things in the PGM too.
I see it like this. If you do a ritual and then receive what you asked for, the ritual is a success. Bonus points for literally any strange and unexpected phenomena occurring during the ritual, but that's not a necessity.
>According to most researchers on the subject, Goetia was practiced mainly by priests/sacerdotes.
I don't know who these researchers are, but personally I don't buy it. I know a few priests and they would probably be horrified or infuriated by Goetia. Probably both.
I feel similarly about PGM, although it's a bit more of a grey area.
On traditional magic only being practiced by spiritual initiates, I think you have a data bias. If your interest is mainly in initiatory traditions, your encounters with magic will be mostly through these traditions. Sorcery and "nigromancy" are frequently decried by Agrippa and others. Likewise in Tibet, Vajrayana emerged by a combination of Buddhism with already extant, indigenous sorcery. Hindu tantrism is also a similar synthesis of Vedanta with (previously quite separate) sorcery.
Magic can be practiced and learnt as a purely technical art. Although it is more fun and wholesome when it is paired with theology and philosophy.
>Here again, every time I was able to discuss with someone, I quickly realized that these "results" were not very impressive.
This type of judgement depends on the criteria you use, and even if it is correct, there can be many causes for it besides a lack of initiation.
I especially recommend against judging people by their vibe. Many people have the vibe but lack the abilities. Some have the abilities but lack the vibe. (Though I can't speak on Opus as I do not know him.)
When reading Agrippa, keep in mind also the precarious state of magic in his day. The reason he emphasised the special privileges of a divinely sanctioned high magic so strongly may to a large extent lie in the fact that, if found guilty of black magic, he would be in serious trouble. Sorcery definitely works and the basic forms of it are not even that hard to learn. I do agree with you that it is kind of mutilated on its own, however. Ideally I also feel that magic should be paired with spiritual growth.

>>24508430
Why would I share naked photos online of the woman I love?

>>24509772
As for the exact magic I practice, I do not actually do any ceremonial magic at this time, but I tackle some of the same works Agrippa did and also use his methods in doing so. He is an important source for me, but I also rely on some ancient and medieval texts, as well as some modern interpretations of them.
It is a form of petitionary ritual magic involving positive entities, so unlike the Goetia there is no coercion, protective circles, threats etc. It resembles a religious service much more closely, quite dissimilar to the Solomonic type of ceremonial magic.

>>24510960

> On the idea that traditional magic is only practiced by spiritual initiates, I think you have a data bias. If your main interest is in initiatory traditions, then your encounters with magic will mostly be through those traditions. Sorcery and "nigromancy" are frequently criticized by Agrippa and others. Similarly, in Tibet, Vajrayana Buddhism emerged from a combination of Buddhism with indigenous sorcery that was already present. Hindu tantrism is also a similar synthesis of Vedantic thought with (previously quite separate) sorcery.

Most Tantrikas are not Vedantists. Moreover, a lot of the magic found in Vajrayana—such as wrathful rituals—can be directly traced back to India. Magic is somewhat inseparable from Vajrayana, since it is present in the tantras. In the Islamic world, magic is related to Sufism and is present within the tariqas (for example, Shams al-Ma'arif was written by a Sufi). It seems that magic was always considered a traditional—but inferior—science, and as such, it can be found in most initiatic traditions.

> I especially recommend against judging people by their "vibe." Many people have the vibe but lack the abilities. Others have the abilities but lack the vibe. (Though I can't speak about Opus, as I do not know him.)

Of course, one can admit this possibility. But I would expect a magician to be different from the masses—that is, if someone truly has the power to use magic, they would have a completely different worldview and way of acting. In fact, anyone with real power would be set apart from the masses.

This also raises the question of why most magicians—even supposedly serious ones—struggle with mundane issues. They often seem like failed "normies." For example, on the old forum Studio Arcanis, there was a member called Brotherblueball, who was clearly very mentally ill, judging by the strange way he wrote. Yet, he was considered a great magician by most members of the forum, many of whom had practiced ceremonial magic for decades! One day, Brotherblueball asked people on the forum for $500 to pay his rent, and no one seemed to question why a supposedly great magician couldn't pay his own rent. This really shook me.


>>24510995
Is it based on the PGM and Voces magicae ?

asking here since anons seem knowledgeable, where to start with chinese folk magic?

>>24511046
>This also raises the question of why most magicians—even supposedly serious ones—struggle with mundane issues. They often seem like failed "normies."
Because they are charlatans. Nobody who parades their occult interests has any serious knowledge/power.

It is as if someone with insider knowledge of the stock market went around telling everyone of what he knows. It would never happen. Life, and magic, is a zero sum game. For me to sit here typing this at ease on a train, billions of humans around the world must be engaged in labor.

>>24509006
yeah that's the point, I'm not gonna read that literally wall of text you call a book.
it's metaphysical slop.
go to church.

>>24511046
>Most Tantrikas are not Vedantists.
I meant that they follow the synthesis of Vedic thought and the native sorcery tradition. Obviously, "tantra" means "extension" (upon the original Vedas) so it's not the Vedas.
>But I would expect a magician to be different from the masses—that is, if someone truly has the power to use magic, they would have a completely different worldview and way of acting. In fact, anyone with real power would be set apart from the masses.
True, although generally most people who practice magic do have a different worldview, even if a little bit. As a rule, the existence of the "supernatural" is admitted. This doesn't necessarily mean that mages will always be powerful people in society. In theory I could use my knowledge to curse or bless politicians, and try to influence society that way. But why go through the trouble? I even avoid most occultists, since I don't want to get roped into any stupid situations.
>Yet, he was considered a great magician by most members of the forum, many of whom had practiced ceremonial magic for decades!
Well, there's a couple of things here. First, just because a mentally ill man practices magic, doesn't mean magic generally is mental illness. And this remains true even if 98% of "mages" are like this (they are not, thankfully).
Second, sometimes smart people make stupid mistakes. So it could be that even experienced ceremonial mages with real attainments could badly misjudge a character.
Thirdly, sometimes very mentally ill people actually practice magic and are even successful. If this man for example was using some kind of charm enhancing spell or individually charming certain users, perhaps that could explain why he was popular despite, in your view, his problematic personality. The same applies to a wealth producing spell - if a psychic influence was operating to produce money for him, it does not matter if this money was sourced from a magic forum, or not.
>Is it based on the PGM and Voces magicae ?
No, although I have a few PGM spells that I would like to perform once I have access to the relevant materials. One example is PGM VII.505-28. I have seen a number of people praise the effectiveness and usefulness of this spell.
>>24511095
I don't know anything about Chinese folk magic. Best I can do is recommend Stephen Skinner's work. I believe he has written some books on Chinese magic (which I have not read). Beyond this, I have zero authors or books I could name. Now, if you asked about Chinese internal alchemy, it would be a different story.
>>24511131
There definitely are a ton of charlatans in magic, but I would be cautious about using absolute words like "nobody". Some individuals can be both attention seeking and studious.

>>24511171
Without being too rude, what differentiates your practice from a simple prayer (apart from all the esoteric aspect, incense, etc.)

>>24511171
>Now, if you asked about Chinese internal alchemy, it would be a different story.
looked a bit onto skinners work, will def check him out but if you could give me some recommendations for chinese internal alchemy that would be awesome. (can you train this on your own or do you need a master/guru?)

>>24511095
Get a copy of the I Ching and three coins.

>>24510994
Because it will turn her on.

>>24511268
>Get a copy of the I Ching
whats the best translation? im still at an hsk 1 lvl mandarin

>>24511196
A secret ingredient that ensures my connection to the spirit I am trying to contact and the use of materials with occult virtues that channel the power of the spirit.
>>24511262
Damo Mitchell's Comprehensive Guide to Daoist Nei Gong is great for the "basics" (actually a pretty advanced system).
His other book White Moon on the Mountain Peak is the high level stuff.
Both practices can cause damage if performed incorrectly. Qi gong can most often damage the body if the postures are improperly practiced, although sometimes it can cause damage to the subtle body as well. Nei dan poses dangers only to the subtle body. Diligence is advised.
Especially with qi gong, I would recommend a few starter lessons with a good teacher, and then periodical check-ins, at least. In-person classes, too. This is not just for the sake of safety and making sure you are performing the exercises correctly, but also in order to ensure their effectiveness. In the first book I named, you will find some basic rookie mistakes that arrest development immediately and effectively quite early on for most people, such as placing the weight in the incorrect part of the foot, or positioning the tail of the spine incorrectly.
I have also heard good things about Mantak Chia, but I don't know anything about his stuff.

>>24511329
thanks for the effort post man, I dont think I have quality teachers in my city, do you think online tearchers are good as well? I was thinking actually about looking for chinese/taiwanese teachers online

>>24511343
Online teaching is also good. The only one I have heard about is Anthony Korahais, although obviously I haven't trained with him so I can't vouch for the quality of the teaching.
Do keep in mind that any posture-based practice can receive only limited correction and feedback via Zoom meetings or whatever. Having someone physically present can make seeing their movements and them watching yours for errors much easier.

>>24511343
Unironically, Rinzai Zen is a good source of inspiration, as Hakuin was influenced by Taoism and developed multiple Qigong techniques. Due to the way lineages work in Zen and its history, Rinzai Zen retains much of the original Qigong, while many Chinese lineages are dubious, to say the least.
I practiced Qi Gong for some times it gives kind a kino feeling of fearlessness, I remember practicing some Qi Gong then walking in a ghetto

>>24511329
Many modern occultists (typically in ItM) consider dhyana as the mental state from which ritual should take place, what do you think of that?

>>24511307
Tricky question. The most acclaimed translation is by Richard Wilhelm, but that was in German. If you want it in English, you will have to accept the risks of double-translation. The Cary Baynes version is the one to go for. It's the one I own, and I like it well enough (pic related).
For a translation directly into English, James Legge is the most famous. I've read his translation of the Tao Te Ching and he seems lucid enough.

>>24511353
dully noted, its just an emergency solution as i cant travel far and dont have teachers in my city (that I know of)
>>24511373
will look into it, thanks man
>>24511524
funnily enough I speak german, might as well take wilhelms translation then

>>24511378
In my understanding, dhyana is a way to measure spiritual awakening. "Attaining the first dhyana" is having your first experience of the astral light, that is, having a spiritual awakening. Further levels are more advanced stages of progression.
I don't think this type of attainment is necessary to do magic. Nor is it necessary to meditate generally in order to do magic. Then again, it depends on the magic.