Search Results
7/19/2025, 3:23:01 PM
>>40755957
of course i think we could also develop further techniques on the part of passive participation by taking notes on theophanic traditions which make use of hypnagogia. the azoetia seems to also involve a sacred relation with sorcerous artwork. i think it is still important that one bothers to actually form a deepened relationship with the images formed, rather than have it something be mass-created by some ai or something, otherwise something of the sacredness gets destroyed. pure repetition of sameness preserves the ideality of the original, while artistic possession re-enfleshes the gods in a vital manner. meanwhile purely artificial means of producing works try and manufacture novelty as though “the new” is just a fetish and not of the gods’ influence.
speaking of the azoetia, chumbley has developed a few rituals in the past for making use of possession for automatic drawing. for instance in the opuscula magica he instructs one to hold the hand in a fixed posture until the hand also loses its feeling. afterwards one releases the hand from its posture (while keeping the mind clear of thoughts/latching onto the feeling of the hand’s vanishing?) until feeling returns to hand. after this one can recite an invocation before letting the drawing begin. you can find the invocation written on page 25 of this pdf document:
https://ia801607.us.archive.org/13/items/opuscula-magica-volume-1-andrew-d-chumbley/Opuscula_Magica_Volume_1_Andrew_D_Chumbley.pdf
this takes us to our second influence here would be traditional witchcraft. as i said already, chumbley plays a lot with divine icons and their use as a means of gaining gnosis. schulke also dedicates some works to this topic. in particular idolatry restor’d provides a great historical overview of these practices. i especially find this quote animating:
of course i think we could also develop further techniques on the part of passive participation by taking notes on theophanic traditions which make use of hypnagogia. the azoetia seems to also involve a sacred relation with sorcerous artwork. i think it is still important that one bothers to actually form a deepened relationship with the images formed, rather than have it something be mass-created by some ai or something, otherwise something of the sacredness gets destroyed. pure repetition of sameness preserves the ideality of the original, while artistic possession re-enfleshes the gods in a vital manner. meanwhile purely artificial means of producing works try and manufacture novelty as though “the new” is just a fetish and not of the gods’ influence.
speaking of the azoetia, chumbley has developed a few rituals in the past for making use of possession for automatic drawing. for instance in the opuscula magica he instructs one to hold the hand in a fixed posture until the hand also loses its feeling. afterwards one releases the hand from its posture (while keeping the mind clear of thoughts/latching onto the feeling of the hand’s vanishing?) until feeling returns to hand. after this one can recite an invocation before letting the drawing begin. you can find the invocation written on page 25 of this pdf document:
https://ia801607.us.archive.org/13/items/opuscula-magica-volume-1-andrew-d-chumbley/Opuscula_Magica_Volume_1_Andrew_D_Chumbley.pdf
this takes us to our second influence here would be traditional witchcraft. as i said already, chumbley plays a lot with divine icons and their use as a means of gaining gnosis. schulke also dedicates some works to this topic. in particular idolatry restor’d provides a great historical overview of these practices. i especially find this quote animating:
Page 1