It was a light-hearted reference to all those flashing gifs and stuff.
Doing it outdoors doesn't mean one cannot have a physical circle. This is why many ceremonial magicians who make portable circles use canvas. It's durable.
… So I think it’s perfectly reasonable to wonder why he’s not using one of the circle he swears by despite the ritual being done outdoors. If the UC is durable then would it not have made sense to use it?
There is a circle, but the offering hair bit which he does a couple of times means, I guess, that he’d be stepping outside something the size of the UC, maybe those flaming torches were giving off some kind of spark, and I mean really, who knows? I was bemused by you asking if he uses it, when it seems to be clearly not there (at about 37:00 too, during the rit when you can clearly see the floor) more than his reasons for doing so/not doing so.
I swear by a few items of equipment I made but I don’t use them all the time, but I’m not going to get into second guessing why a guy I don’t know did something, just answering the more obvious bits that leap out at me from this vid.
You guys sure do seem hung up on those circles - 21 pages on the Solomonic one and nobody mentioned the most likely reason why, ref: EA’s previous stuff on the UC, it didn’t have godnames - something that was so easy to find, even I managed it; then, before that, 6 pages on the UC and nobody saw on the free internet lecture where EA talks about the origin of the letters? It looks more like a peanut gallery commentary than serious enquiry.
You didn't answer the question. That spirit has nothing to do with prophecy and revelation. Just because the spirit overcame many obstacles and grew to great power doesn't mean he can somehow give prophecies.
The vid mentions, less than a minute in, that he was on a course of trying to get prophecy & revelation from both Ahriman & AD - not that this specific rit with AD was about getting a prophecy. The questions EA asks start out very differently (I imagine) than what he’d planned anyway, because the spirit’s weakening him.
As much time as you spend reading my posts on WF (which you alluded to in your last post by saying I tend to make sense in what I say over there) it's interesting you didn't read that I already came to the conclusion that the video is of an invocation rather than an evocation and that Koetting should proof read/watch his work before sending it out to the public.
Yeah I lurk on a lot of forums - I’d go over and join but I just don’t have the self-discipline to not get wrapped up into conversations, I have to limit myself.
If you answered your own question to your satisfaction, why come back over asking - I wonder which parts are unanswered by now, that don’t have to do with stuff only EA could answer?
Demon bowls come from the same vicinity as the spirit he is calling. Rather than using the spirit pot to capture the essence of Ahriman he could have used a demon bowl. Modern magicians have figured out how to use demon bowls for actual spirit work rather than just commanding. Perhaps you should do some research before posting. You admitted you know don't know much about demons bowls, so the intelligent thing would have been to study up on it first before posting.
No, I don’t know much about demon bowls, but I do seem to know how to find information about what someone’s standing on in a video (by the stunningly dark, spooky, occult method of actually watching the damned thing), so I’ll take my level of comprehension over yours! :o)
Seriously, you’re asking why someone didn’t do something you thought was superior, I offered what I think is the reason based on having read how the guy likes to work, you think he could still have used it.
Yeah, maybe - but is it a valid crit of the video? I don’t think so. Probably only if you don’t think a magician should ever try something new, or at least, different from what conventional wisdom is currently doing.
I get a feeling EA doesn’t use methods that even hark back to the old “commanding under godnames” paradigm, for example back on the EA lecture, I think he mentions he rarely uses a triangle even though he also says that the spirit isn’t normally confined within it, I forget which bit but it’s right there. While it might not be what you’d do, it at least puts this choice into a congruent context.
Well, this isn't the topic of the conversation but since you brought it up, let's dance shall we:
I have not seen that video and I just watched it now, starting at 29:30 until 33:15. So the lettering is Aramic, good and well. Then why was it marketed as a demonic language, which is exactly what the e-mail said; an ancient demonic tongue. Aramaic isn’t demonic. And did you even read the link that you posted? Because you linked directly to my post and in my post I said that it’s more believable to be Aramaic than demonic. So, Koetting confirmed in the video it’s Aramaic, fine. Why market it as demonic?
He mentions it was given by demons. Was ancient Aramaic inspired by demons, just like a lot of really devout Hindus think Sanskrit came from their Divine, or like a lot of people think Odin gave us the runes? That’s another question - however, I’m not great at languages, but when a spirit gives me information in a mix of Latin, Greek and Spanish (as has happened) then I personally consider that information to be spirit-inspired and if, as he clearly says, it took him a while until someone who knew the ancient language recognised it as Aramaic, then I’d go with that being just as valid a descriptor.
I’d be more curious to know what it spells out in those ancient Aramaic characters myself.
Just because, in your opinion, you have better questions doesn't make my questions any less valid. If your questions are "far better" you wouldn't have taken the time to answer my "less better" questions now would you?
Yes, I had time on my hands… 
It’s the whole way you had a load of answers on your bling-wiz forum and here, not to mention things you can clearly see in the video, and then came back and asked us here that made me offer my opinions on them.
I’m not EA, Ahriman, nor Azi Dahaka however, so they’re just opinions which, since you posted here and not directly to EA, you seemed to be asking for. Take them for what they’re worth - I only bothered because the questions about why the SC didn’t have godnames, and the issue of the language on the UC, seemed to me quite simple things to work out the reasons for based on videos that are right on this site & YouTube, and yet they sure generated a lot of yack, both on your forum and when people came over and posted on this one.
