Golden Dawn HRU/HUA debate...

[Darius120]

Well, I asked Wizard if he thought that HRU was the great avenging Angel
along with Pat and he avioded the question. Guess no one wants to step on
someones toes. Wizards theory is that if you do the work, you will
eventually find out. mmmm, so if one is doing the work, all the material
in the regardie book and all the other G.D. material and all the other
books and other sources will be discovered. (Atleast this is the way I
understand his thread of thought) Thus we have no need for any books
whatsoever. There is no need for any groups, there is no need to pay to
attend a lecture, because if one is doing the work, we will find out
sooner or later! Yikes, with this kind of logic we may all be in deep
sh-t.

It really does not matter to me what Wizard thinks. So if anyone else has
an opinion on the HRU/HUA debate brought forth by Pat Zalewski, we would
like to hear it. As the invocation of Thoth goes: "By what ever name I
call thee..."

Darius

(talking magic on alt. magic...what a novel idea)

[R Brzustowicz]

In article <4mci4n$2...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,

Darius120 <dari...@aol.com> wrote:
>Well, I asked Wizard if he thought that HRU was the great avenging Angel
>along with Pat and he avioded the question.

Did someone claim that Pat was a great avenging angel?

R Brzustowicz

[Gratuitous Pseudonym]

In article <4mci4n$2...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,

dari...@aol.com (Darius120) wrote:
>Well, I asked Wizard if he thought that HRU was the great avenging Angel

>along with Pat and he avioded the question. Guess no one wants to step on
>someones toes. Wizards theory is that if you do the work, you will
>eventually find out. mmmm, so if one is doing the work, all the material
>in the regardie book and all the other G.D. material and all the other
>books and other sources will be discovered. (Atleast this is the way I
>understand his thread of thought) Thus we have no need for any books
>whatsoever. There is no need for any groups, there is no need to pay to
>attend a lecture, because if one is doing the work, we will find out
>sooner or later! Yikes, with this kind of logic we may all be in deep
>sh-t.

Not necessarily. From my point of view, the debate as to HUA or HRU being the
name of the avenging angel is a matter of personal import, but not of fact.
The important thing about a magical symbol system is its self-consistency, not
its agreement with others.

If Pat finds that transposing these names makes better sense to him than the
usual attribution, then he is free to use that change. This does not make
everyone else's use incorrect, though.

Wizard is correct in avoiding a rush to judgement here. If one does the work,
and finds that one's experiences tally with the symbols used by some who have
gone before, then that is well and good. If one finds that things are
somewhat different than others describe, that also is good information.

The real problem occurs when the symbolic attributions lead to a
self-contradiction. A magical system holds together by its own inner
consistency, not by its adherence to tradition. Admittedly, it is much more
difficult to assemble a completely consistent symbol system as complex as that
needed for effective magical work than it is to rely on traditional sources,
but there is sufficient cause to doubt the traditional attributions in enough
cases that it is wise to question them from time to time.